Short Dialogue Between a Muslim and an Ex-Muslim Atheist Regarding the Quran

1. From Br. Mughal’s (Atheist) — 1st Feb 2003

Dear All,

Thank you for your kindness. As I said before I am not a person with ample time so my response is going to be on as and when I can basis.

As for the proof, let me explain as to what I am talking about. In ordinary claims or cases the proofs required are also ordinary but in extraordinary claims or cases the proofs also needs to be extraordinary. To put it another way, supernatural claims need supernatural proofs.

As for ordinary proof, it is a matter of logically linking all the relevant facts perfectly about a claim to show a water tight case without any lose ends. There are no other even equally valid alternative explanations never mind the better ones. Word proof simply means something perfect for its purpose ie there are no holes in it or nothing is left out or missing ie the thing is complete. In words like waterproof or fireproof etc etc one can see clearly the purpose of word proof. The water-proof cloth is perfect for not allowing water to pass from one side of it to another ie there are no holes supposed to be in it.

As for the legal proof, there are no holes in its explanation of all the related facts as regarding a case the way they are put together. If alternative explanation are possible in a case then the case remains unproven. If there are any flaws or faults of any sort then the explanation is as good as no explanation at all. So one can see that proof is all about facts that are obvious hence they are called evident and are therefore used as evidence. Logic is all about putting all the related obvious or self evident facts together in such a way that they leave no room for alternative explanations. This is the difference between evidence and proof. One is collection of mere facts and the other is collection of facts and their logical linkages as well. This is why proof by its very nature is factual as well as logical and therefore the whole thing is scientific.

From above explanation it should be clear that science is all about real world and not about imaginary world or if you prefer spiritual world. Anything that has no basis in reality cannot be scientific, for science is only and only limited to observation of concrete reality or facts within our grasp which we then use for forming hypothesis as regard more facts which we then test for their truth. If we find confirmation we accept them as facts or alternatively our scientific hypothesis are proven wrong so we must start all over again. Let me explain. Let say, a person is walking along a road and discovers a human body on the road. He makes assumptions ie the person is sleeping or he is dead. To confirm his assumption he calls the person to get up. When the person hears the call, he gets up. So the first assumption that the caller made proves right ie the guy was sleeping. However, his 2nd assumption proves wrong.

Let say, the person was dead. Now this guy calls the police. When the police come, they too make assumptions ie is this a natural death, is this a suicide, is this an accidental death or is it a murder? They know that all their assumptions cannot be true so they need to eliminate their wrong assumptions so that they could get to the truth. Now when they examine the body they find several bullet holes in the head of the victim. This eliminates accidental death, natural death as well as suicide. Why? Because natural death does not involve bullet holes in the head. Too many bullet holes in the head need too much time and effot by shooter therefore it cannot be self inflicted death nor accidental. Moreover, the weapon used is not found at the crime scene by forensic scientists or crime scene investigators nor any suicide note etc etc. Now police are sure that this is a murder investigation.

They begin collecting further evidences from the crime scene as well as look for any witnesses who might have seen something about this murder. They keep witness statements separate from the other factual evidences that have been gathered from the crime scene. They do not bend statements of the witnesses nor the facts of the crime scene to fit them with each other rather they match them as they are by super imposing them onto each other to see if they match together perfectly or are there any lose ends which need further investigation. If there are no lose ends the case is solved but if there are then investigation continues till police have all the facts and their perfect explanation without any lose ends. They have to be reasonably sure that the court will not throw their case out due to obvious lack of proof.

So people who claim the quran to be a scientific miracle need to be very careful, for such a claim about any religious scripture is wrong. No scripture can stand scientific scrutiny therefore it is better for those who wish to keep their faith to keep their spiritual matters to themselves.

Why it is impossible to prove alleged divine scriptures divine? It is because science is all about real world. For example, let say, I assume that my next door neighbour is at home. I assume this because I see a light is on in his house. However, to make sure or to verify my this assumption I must go and knock on his door to see if he really is at home. So I go and do that and he opens the door, so my assumption proves right.

Now one must be able to see that first of all my assumption was based on facts and 2ndly it was capable of being verified. This makes it a scientific assumption which is called hypothesis. If I had made an assumption that could not be verified ie it was impossible to be verified then because of that impossibility it could not be called a scientific assumption. For example, by looking at the universe I make the assumption that there may be a creator for this universe. Now, is it possible to verify this assumption? The answer is, no. It is for this very reason that this assumption cannot be called scientific, for none can verify it ever.

It is for this reason that religion can be proven false by science but can never be proven true by it.

So please think about it.

2. Br. Mughal’s second article 1st Feb 2003

Dear brethren,

As I was saying above that science can prove religion false but it cannot prove it true. The question is why or how?

Why it cannot prove religion true has been explained ie spiritual matters are beyond the scope of science, for science is only and only about things that really exist and somehow they can be verified, if not today maybe in a million years when methods and systems have been invented.

How science can prove religion false? This is simple. If the religious scriptures contain information about this world which is within our grasp then science is capable of testing them or verifying them. Now if the information contained in the alleged divine scriptures about this world proves false then the information they contain about any other world cannot be regarded true either i.e. the whole thing becomes doubtful.

Now why or how should one study the scriptures and the science to get that result? As explained already, the purpose of study is then to understand the alleged divine testimony on its own and take the observed scientific evidences and super-impose them onto each other as they are and see if they match perfectly or are there any lose ends.

If there are lose ends, discrepancies, flaws or contradictions between them then the scripture is false but if they match perfectly, it still does not lead to the only conclusion that the scripture definitely divine in its origin, for such a thing cannot be verified or proven. We cannot prove that man can talk to god nor that god can talk to man and that is where we get stuck.

All alleged divine scriptures including the quran fail the scientific test. The question is, what is quran? The quran is a partial collection of speeches or lectures of Muhammad. They number 114. When these lectures were written collected or delivered etc etc is not stated clearly. If you open up a copy of the quran, there are two orders given to suras. The compilation order whereby suras are put together in a haphazard way and the chronological order that is disputed or at best is not certain. The way the lectures are structured and delivered raise the possibility that some may have been left out during the collection of the quran. Some Shia scholars have been raising such issues already.

Abrogation theory and bit by bit revelation of the quran creates many pitfalls. Besides all this the quran as we have it contains wrong information about this world. For example, collect all the verses of the quran which describe this universe and sketch a quranic map of the universe with help of ancient tafsir or explanations of the quran. Once you have done that then study also the scientific pam of the universe and see how different they are. The quran has all its information from the bible. The writing styles are different because one is written as stories to be told and the other as lectures to be delivered.

The structure of quran lectures can be analysed. They are about faith in Allah then about praising Allah and then about obeying Allah. Thereafter they begin to give importance to faith in prophethood and obeying divine messengers. As Muhammad begins to get support they begin to bring in political, social, cultural and economic aspects and practices thus what begins as a matter of personal faith ends up as war against infidel for dominantion of islam.

There are so many issues that need well detail study of the subject matters that I cannot discuss them in one go. I am not an atheist because I want to be but because that is where my study of holy scripture led me to. Most muslims have no access to islamic literature not even the holy quran. If you are in any doubt please visit the villages and cities of muslim states. I have done that and found that most people know their religion only due to local central mosque lectures that are delivered on Fridays by imaams. Yes there are many other religious events like URS, KHATAMS and IJTIMAS when lectures are delivered. These lectures are only delivered to keep the congregation at least for donations or imaams will lose their livelihood. They do not discuss things which might reveal the truth about religion.

Religion is used by powerful clever people to make fool of destitute. I will try and expand on issues I have raised as and when I can.

So till then take care.

3. Response from me — 5th February 2003

Br. Mughal, peace be with you.

Thanks for your two posts, both of which you posted on the 1st of Feb. You have dealt with a few things but I think they can best be summarised into four points:

1. ‘Proof’ of a claim is a logical assimilation of facts that verify an event or a story which leaves no room for alternative explanations.
2. Religion can be proven false because it cannot be proven true. It cannot be proven true scientifically because science only deals with reality and not spirituality
3. Following on from point 2, normal events can only be verified via normal proof, hence supernatural events can only be substantiated by supernatural proof.
4. Even if modern science can verify the verses pertaining to science, this does not mean that they are of divine origin because man cannot talk to God.

Topics that are covered:

A) Responses to your claims

1. Definition of ‘Proof’
2. Can Religion be proven false?
3. Normal proof vs supernatural proof
4. Scientific verification does not mean divine origin?

B) The Quran and Proof
C) The Quran and Scientific Testing
D) The Origin of the Quran?
E) Conclusion

A) Responses to your claims

1. Definition of ‘Proof’

I agree with your definition.

2. Can Religion be proven false?

My summary of your views in point number 2 shows that your argument is circular. Essentially what you are saying is that Religion can be proven to be false because it deals with the realm of the supernatural which is beyond reality, hence beyond the reach of science. In other words you are stating that an event or a scripture is ‘proven’ to be false because is cannot be verified. I hope you agree that this is a logical fallacy. How can an event be proven to be false if it cannot be verified one way or the other? An event or a claim can either be ‘true’ or ‘false’. We arrive at the truth through the process of observation, testing, measuring and then concluding. Thus a claim can be proven ‘true’ or ‘false’ using this mechanism. If a claim cannot be verified, then it cannot be verified, that’s it we can go no further and would have to wait until a mechanism can be developed to verify or disprove the claim. What you have done is something quite different, i.e. you assume that a claim that cannot be verified must be false. There is no logical link that takes you from ‘I cannot verify this claim’ — -> ‘Therefore it must be false’.

If I were to go along with your in-built assumption that religion is beyond reality, hence cannot be substantiated by normal proof then the conclusion we can best draw from this is that ‘religion cannot be proven to be true yet’. We cannot conclude that ‘religion is therefore false’.

3. Normal proof vs supernatural proof

We can agree on what we mean by normal proof, i.e. a proof which was arrived at through the process of observation, measurement, evaluation, deduction and conclusion. I don’t know what you mean by supernatural proof. A further explanation of this would be welcome.

I disagree with your assertion that science only deals with reality (what we can perceive). Science is abound with theories which are outside our reality, i.e. a multi-dimensional universe (Superstring Theory), black holes, wormholes connecting different universes, travelling faster than light, time travel, Quantum universe (which behaves differently from the mechanistic universe) etc. All of these are outside our current perceptions of reality, yet such theories exist to explain the mechanics of our universe and may one day be verified. As far as scriptures are concerned that relate to the spiritual realm, angels, Heaven, Hell etc. these are realms of the unseen, something we cannot perceive now and which goes beyond current science. Just because 21st Century science cannot verify the spiritual realm, does not mean that religion is false, it simply means that 21st Century science is limited. If 21st Century science can accommodate theories that are beyond our current reality, then it stands to reason that one day in future science will be able to verify the existence of other things that are beyond our reality namely, the Soul, Angels, Jinns, Heaven and Hell.

4. Scientific verification does not mean divine origin?

You made the claim that even if the scripture matches perfectly (i.e. no errors, contradictions etc.) then it does not necessarily mean it is of divine origin. The reason being that man cannot talk to God, hence His existence cannot be verified.

Firstly you have made an assumption that a scripture can in fact match the findings of modern science. Something which you said was not possible, hence this is a contradiction. Secondly, you are talking about two unrelated things. The origin of the scriptures and the lack of communication between God and Man. You made a wrong assumption that because Man cannot talk with God → therefore the scriptures cannot be of divine origin. How does one lead to the other? There is no logical linkage between the two statements.

B) The Quran and Proof

You made a statement in your earlier post:

“Now if the information contained in the alleged divine scriptures about this world proves false then the information they contain about any other world cannot be regarded true either i.e. the whole thing becomes doubtful”.

This is a good assumption to make. Using your logic, the reverse argument is also valid, i.e. if the information contained in the alleged divine scriptures about this world proves true then the information they contain about any other world would also be true.

In my previous post I did recommend some materials for you to read and watch. Judging by your two posts (1st Feb), the booklet which I recommended, ‘The Amazing Quran’ by Gary Miller would in fact answer your arguments about proof and testing claims. Miller referred to the story of Einstein when he came up with a theory. The theory in itself has to be proven to be true AND there were falsification tests as well. In other words, ‘this is how you can prove the theory wrong’. Einstein’s theory passed the falsification tests, which is why he was listened to. So the Quranic falsification test is as follows:

“Do they not consider the Qur’an? Had it been from any other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancy.” (4:82)

This is a verse for people who think and ponder, especially for the Atheists. Our Creator is talking directly to the sceptic and asking him to ponder.


C) The Quran and Scientific Testing

In your previous post you claimed that the Quran fails the scientific test. You gave an explanation for this by making an argument which is not related to your claim. You talked about the compilation of the Quran and the apparent haphazard way it was compiled, with its chronology in dispute. The compilation of the Quran does not prove that the Quran fails the scientific test…they are unrelated to each other.

However, in your next paragraph you do refer to a relevant example, i.e. an aspect of science mentioned in the Quran, which is the nature of our universe. You claimed that the Quranic view of the universe is different from the modern scientific view. You have not provided the evidence to support your claim but instead continued to make an assertion that the Quranic description of the universe was copied from the Bible and then concluded that the Bible was written as stories to be told whereas the Quran was written as lectures to be delivered. How do you get from the nature of the universe to the writing styles of the scriptures? I would be interested to know how one distinguishes between a piece of writing which are ‘stories to be told’ from a piece of writing which are ‘lectures to be delivered’?

Now, back to the universe. The book which I am sure you have come across that talks about the Quran/Bible and Science is a book called, ‘The Quran and Modern Science’ by Dr. Maurice Bucaille. Any Muslim would cite this book, which is quite popular and is a classic. Dr. Bucaille went into great detail in examining the scientific statements that the Quran and Bible made and compared them with modern science. He concluded that the Quranic statements on science does not contradict established scientific facts…in fact modern science verifies what the Quran says. There is a section on Astronomy and the universe. The Quranic view of the universe has been corroborated by modern science, from the Big Bang, the expansion of the universe to space travel. So I am a bit perplexed as to why you claim that science disproves the Quran about the universe and why you believe that the Quran took the stories from the Bible when the Biblical and the Quranic descriptions of the universe are different.

Our Creator asks the sceptics:

“Do not the unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together, then We clove them asunder, and made from water every living thing? Will they not then believe?” (21:30)

As well as the materials which I have recommended for you to read, you should watch the video debate entitled, ‘The Quran and the Bible in the Light of Science’. This was an informative debate between Dr. Zakir Naik (Muslim side) and Dr. William Campbell (Christian side). You will get a better appreciation of the scientific miracles in the Quran and wouldn’t be so dismissive as you are now without investigation.

D) The Origin of the Quran?

Remember your argument which I reversed,

“if the information contained in the alleged divine scriptures about this world proves true then the information they contain about any other world would also be true”.

If you have followed the arguments put forward by Muslims, i.e. the books and videos which I recommended, then you would conclude that the Quran does withstand the scientific scrutiny and that there are no errors. So when the Quran is proven true about the nature of our world and universe, then it follows that the Quran would also be true when in talks about the realms of the unseen, Jinns, Angels, Heaven, Hell. This is using your logic. It would also follow that if the Quran has been proven true scientifically — -> then it must be authentic → hence it is where it claims to be from, our Creator → therefore the Creator exists.

Remember your discussion about proof? You made a valid statement that a proof is a proof when alternative explanations are invalid. So what alternative explanations are there to explain the origin of the Quran? A few have been put forward:

1. Forgery from the Bible: The Quran answers this directly and issues a challenge to produce something like it if it is a forgery. People have tried and failed. So this option is closed.
2. Satan inspired: Some Christians argue that Satan inspired Muhammad (S). Again the Quran answers this charge directly.
3. Muhammad’s own composition: Again the Quran answers this charge succinctly

Once the alternative explanations have been exhausted and closed, and that the Quran is authentic, then it stands to reason that the origin of the Quran is Divine.


E) Conclusion

Once we have established that the Quran is not of human origin one obstacle that still remains is that you would still deny the Divine origin of the Quran because we cannot see God nor talk to Him. Remember that these are two different things, i.e. proving that the Quran is from God and being able to communicate with God directly.

Just because we cannot see God nor talk to Him does not mean that he doesn’t exist, but there are signs of His existence. Our Creator has communicated with us through His revelation and is asking you and me to ponder over the Quran and to ponder over His creation. I have already cited two verses from the Quran which addresses sceptics directly. These verses should set you thinking.

Do you still want to see God in order to believe in Him? Our Creator answers the atheists directly and is an invitation to think and reflect:

“And those who have no knowledge say: “Why does not Allah speak to us (face to face) or why does not a sign come to us?” So said the people before them words of similar import. Their hearts are alike, We have indeed made plain the signs for people who believe with certainty”. (2:118)

“And they say: “Why are not signs sent down to him from his Lord?” Say: “The signs are only with Allah and I am only a plain warner. Is it not sufficient for them that We have sent down to you the Book (The Quran) which is recited to them? Verily, herein is mercy and a reminder (or an admonition) for a people who believe”. (29:50–51)

4. By Mughal 8th February 2003

Dear brother HA Imam,

First of all thank you for saving the posts and posting them. That was very kind of you.

Dear brother I only raised issue or hinted at them just to out line the ideas around which I wanted to build my case. Unfortunately the posts are lost and I have little time at the moment to go over. However, you have raised a couple of interesting points which I would like to expand upon.

I have raised the point that proof and proving etc is necessary. However, I have not defined the proof, for I have no idea what would prove religious claims. That is left for those who are religious and make it their business that others too should live as they say.

I explained a bit about ordinary proof and proving but my definition was only hinted at and is by no means complete or perfect. I did not complete it because when we debate religion ordinary definitions do not matter. The reason is because they only and only deal with physical realities and so anything that is nonphysical is beyond such definitions.

Since spiritualism or spiritual world as religious people call it is imaginary to me I cannot define anything about it. Again the reason is because it is not self evident. When the issue is about something that is not self evident even logic no longer can be used to decide the issue, for even logic needs to be confirmed for being right or wrong. In physical world when you make a statement about physical events or objects, the events or objects are self evident. Logic is only a sequence of events or linkage to explain the actual events or objects. Thus the whole thing ie event, object or sequence etc all can be verified if methods and systems are available and that is what is accepted as proof.

Now when we talk about nonphysical things eg god, angels etc etc etc we merely start with assumptions that cannot be verified and also end up with assumptions that cannot be verified. This is why we end up as confused as we are at the beginning. It is therefore wrong to call such of our assumptions logical, for logic has to serve a purpose and the purpose is to connect self evident facts. For example, if there was a murder, assuming we have the statement of a witness and the crime scene evidence. We are trying to explain the event in the light of self evident facts as explained by the witness. Here we are trying to establish how exactly the victim met his death. This event begins with find of the body for example and ends at the death of the victim as explained by witness statement which explains the sequence of self evident facts along the way eg the murderer took out his gun and he shot the victim so many times in the head killing him instantly etc etc.

Police found the murder weapon, the finger prints of killer on the gun and bullets taken from the victim’s body proved to be fired from the gun in question etc etc etc thus witness statement links killer to victim etc etc. Here logic or sequence can also be tested and thus it is accepted correct, for if it was not correct then it would fail to explain event properly.

Now this is not and cannot be the case when we argue about nonphysical or so called spiritual things. If one man claims that he has given a book to another man then this can be tested and proved or disproved. However, if a man claims that he has received a book from a spirit then that creates a problem. First we can dispute about the existence of spirit then we can dispute the existence of any such book and then we will also doubt the mental state of the person who has made such a claim. Since proof in physical world is only physical, for it only and only involves physical facts and logic about them so having no such proof disqualifies the claim altogether.

If one assumes a god then one has to assume a whole lot more to create assumptuous explanations one after the other leading to nothing confirmable at all. So in this case we begin with an assumption and end at the assumption hence there is no logic involved, for statements whereby one may try to link unfounded assumptions are absurd, for they cannot be confirmed by physical facts.

I myself get involved in such explanations because otherwise it may not make sense to people what I am talking about.

There are only the following possibilities when connecting any two things.

The connection is between two physical things. This can be proven eg you are talking to me.

The connection between two nonphysical things. This cannot be proven eg one angel talking to another.

The connection between a physical thing and a nonphysical thing. This also cannot be proven eg an angel talking to a man.

There is no method or system which could do so, as far as I know. It is for this reason that I separate between personal faith and organised religion. Personal faith is a private matter and is only limited to the person himself. Organised religion is a political entity with political interests and agendas. It has nothing to do with morality or betterment of mankind, for it is fixed in time of its origin.

If one’s faith makes one a better person, fine but if an organised religion destroys people lives by its absurdities then it must be eliminated, for it is dangerous for mankind.

Religion could be dangerous in different ways eg it could be encouraging violence by one people to another or it could be teaching them to live in the world in such a way that people become unproductive and useless.

It is for this reason I accept what brother Shamsul Arefin says, for he interprets his faith in a way that I do not see it poses any danger to me or people like myself or others. However, I would see sunni shia versions of islam eliminated, for they seem to be threaten at least if not out right violent. I believe in coexistence not on the basis of tolerance of each other but active cooperation between people for progress and prosperity of all of us.

If I have the time I will try and exand the issue.

Thanks again for your input and good luck and

5. Response from me — 6th March 2003

Br. Mughal, peace.

Thank you for your response dated 8th February.

The main thrust of your post was that we cannot attempt to prove religion to be correct because it is in the realm of the spiritual, which in turn cannot be verified by our physical senses. 80% of your post was a repetition of your earlier post where you highlighted the difficulty in veriSng the spiritual. Remember your previous quote?

“Now if the information contained in the alleged divine scriptures about this world proves false then the information they contain about any other world cannot be regarded true either i.e. the whole thing becomes doubtful”.

This quote can be reversed and we can draw the following conclusion using your logic:

“if the information contained in the alleged divine scriptures about this world proves true then the information they contain about any other world would also be true”.

In my previous response I did go into detail to address your objection and how it was possible to verify religion without referring to the spiritual (in this case Islam and the Quran). What you have seemed to done in your recent post is to re-state your previous statements….hence not an argument.

The remaining 20% of your post talked about something new, keeping religion private and how Sunni/Shia Islam seem to be threatening and violent…without veriSng it.

A request is made to address my previous post which did go into detail regarding your understanding of proof of religion (in this case Islam).

Peace

6. From Br. Mughal — 10th August 2003

My very dear brother Hassan Ali Imaam,
Assalaamu alaikum.

How are you? I am grateful for your lovely welcome.

Dear brother, may I take opportunity to invite you to my latest post on the thread about, is it time to ditch islam?

This will clarify my approach to the question of religious truth and the reason behind it ie why testing any alleged divine scripture is necessary? In my view truth is more important for natural conclusion in this matter.

If religion thereby proves true we must accept it true without any favour otherwise reject it without any fear.

Coming to the posts we started some time ago, I think we agreed on most of the rules as to proof and proving.

The only problem is that the rule that if the quran contain mistakes as regard things in this world then it is proven false but that rule you think can be reversed and think it cannot be reversed.

Your reason on which you are basing its reversal is invalid because that will not work. Dear brother rule is only rule if it works. For example, you can see that if the quran contains mistakes about things in this world then it cannot be perfect and so cannot be from any source that is supposed to be perfect. This is a valid rule because it works and its working is obvious ie the inconsistency in the evidence is clear to see or witness.

Now let see what happens if we reverse it. If the quran is perfect as regard things in this world does that really mean that there is no possibility of mistakes in it as regard things world beyond? The answer is, no, it does not eliminate that possibility. So the reversal of this rule becomes invalid because fault in the evidence definitely rules out perfection but no fault in a part of evidence does not rule out imperfection in the rest of the evidence.

So we have multifold problem here ie one that scripture is a physical information but the alleged author ie god is not so that link cannot be established and the other of not being able to verify the total contents of the scripture ie data about the next world. Yet other problem is that not only we cannot verify information about the next world but also most of the information about this world. For getting about heaven and hell for the moment, are we able to verify the quranic claims about people and their environment that have passed away? The answer I am afraid is, no. I mean what proof is there about adam, eve, noah, abraham, moses and so on and so forth? None whatsoever. All such statements in the quran are mere claims that are based on nothing.

Coming to the science in the quran. Dear brother, I see no science in the quran whatsoever. Let me take cosmology for example. In the quran 21/30 we are told that the heavens and the earth were joined together and allah separated them. My first question is, what are the heavens and the earth? Is it Allah talking about the earth we are living on? If that is the case then where are the heavens which were joined with the earth? As for Dr Buccaulle, his books show that he knows very little about astronomy and the quran. I read his books in late 70s and early 80s. To me he got confused about them both.

Here is what the quran states as regard the heavens and the earth. The heavens are seven one above the other. They are above the earth like a canopy, for they are all alike 2/22,29, 7/54, 17/44, 37/6,40/63, 41/12, 67/3, 71/15,72/8, 78/12, etc etc etc… The sun and the moon are in their midst. The stars make the lowest heaven beautiful. The heavens and the earth and all that which they contain was created in six days as a single step.

Read these verses of the quran my dear friend and the ones around them and draw a locating map of all these things the quran has mentioned in relation to each other. You will see the quranic map of the universe before your very eyes. It has no resemblance to the astronomical map of the universe. Nor has it anything to do with the idea of the bigbang but I will try and come back to that point later.

It is wrong to say that the earth was stuck with the heavens because there are no heavens with the earth? Moreover, when the universe was created or came into being there was no earth nor water or heavens. The quran insists that the heavens and the earth were created or came to being at the same time but that is not the way the science of cosmology sees it.

So please let me have your vision of the world according to the quran and science both if possible so that we could take this discussion further.

7. By Mughal 14th August 2003, (edited by me for simplicity)

THE SCIENCE AND THE QURAN (By Mughal)

Introduction:

One must realise that science is factual ie experimental and theoretical knowledge about the world in which we live. In short science is about observation of our environment as far as it is possible for us to do so. Based upon our observations we can make assumptions as to what else may be there and try to create experiments by way of inventing systems and methods to be able to verify those assumptions. Having as many facts as we have at any given time, we try to explain them and this explanation we call theory. The ideas that explain maximum number of available facts are accepted and the rest put on hold or rejected.

For example, the police find a body and examine it. They then make assumptions as to how the person might have met his death ie did he die a natural death? Was it an accidental death? Did the person commit suicide or was he murdered etc etc? They then look for clues as to which of their this assumption may be the correct one. For example, if the body and the place where the body was found shows no sign of foul play or suspicious clues then it is taken as a natural death. If the clues show signs of accident then it is taken as accidental death. If the clues show the signs of suicide then it is taken as suicide and likewise if the signs are found to raise suspicion of murder then the murder investigation is launched and different theories are created according to so far available information and thus various lines of inquiry are followed till conclusion is reached in this matter.

2) The followers of the quran have raised the claims that the quran is word of god and that the proof is, whatever the quran says about this world is true and can be verified by way of scientific exploration and research. They quote 4/82 for example ie if the quran was from other than god it would have had faults in it and since the quran does not have faults in it therefore the quran is word of god. This argument is invalid to begin with. One may ask, why is that? It is invalid because it can be proven true only one way and not the both ways. If the quran contains faults then it is definitely not perfect and therefore cannot be word of god either and so this argument becomes valid, for proof is in front of your eyes ie the faults in the alleged divine scripture.

Why the reverse is not true? If the quran did not contain even a single fault as regard this world, it can still not be free of suspicion and doubt as regard the information about the next world which remains to be verified or tested. Now the case is not only about the validity of the quranic statements regarding the hereafter but also as I have pointed out the quran contains many claims that are not verifiable even about this world eg did a man called noah ever exist? Do angels and demons really exist? So many of the quranic claims are mere claims and nothing more. The shooting stars driving away jinns makes no sense because jinns are not supposed to be effected by material things and if they are we should be able to detect their presence in this very world. The case is same with the idea of angles and spirits, for interaction between so called spiritual world ought to be either possible or not possible at all. Such quranic confusions in themselves are sufficient proof that most quranic claims are fiction and have nothing to do with the science.

3) Since Muslims claim the quran is full of scientific information I am going to comment on some quran verses as to their true meanings in contrast with science. So, let us look at the verses in the quran regarding cosmology.

Part 1:

“Who has made the earth your couch, and the heavens your canopy; and sent down rain from the heavens; and brought forth therewith Fruits for your sustenance; then set not up rivals unto Allah when ye know (the truth).” (2:22)

Comment 1:
The quran here by word AL-ARD means the earth we are living on but what are the heavens= ASSAMAAWAAT? Where are they located looking from the earth? They are not spherical but semi-spherical. It is clear from this verse that heavens are skies one above the other ie domes raised high above the earth that are thought of as solid build physical structures. They are as solid as the earth itself but are made of some other material perhaps eg copper etc 55/37. The earth is thought to be the floor and the heavens the coverings over it like a tent or roof. This idea will become clear as we read more and more verses.

Part 2:

”It is He Who hath created for you all things that are on earth; Moreover His design comprehended the heavens, for He gave order and perfection to the seven firmaments; and of all things He hath perfect knowledge. (2.29)”

Comment 2:
Now we are clearly told that there are seven heavens above the earth that are all almost identical. As we continue we will see that the quran tells us clearly that these heavens are one above the other. The way they are located is, they are all above the earth not below it. The rain is sent down from the lowest heaven to the earth so this heaven is actually visible from the earth as far as the quran is concerned. However, what is visible is the blue sky which is not a solid structure as the quran would have us believe. So it is the blue sky that is thought of as the lowest heaven which is made of solid material because it has doors and windows, and that pieces of it could break and fall on the people due to denying faith in the god of the quran.

Part 3:

Lord of the heavens and of the earth and all between them, and Lord of every point at the rising of the sun! We have indeed decked the lower heaven with beauty (in) the stars (For beauty) and for guard against all obstinate rebellious evil spirits, (So) they should not strain their ears in the direction of the Exalted Assembly but be cast away from every side, Repulsed, for they are under a perpetual penalty. Except such as snatch away something by stealth, and they are pursued by a flaming fire, of piercing brightness. (37:5–10)


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. 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).
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.” 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. (41:9–12)

Allah is He Who created seven Firmaments and of the earth a similar number. Through the midst of them (all) descends His Command: that ye may know that Allah has power over all things, and that Allah comprehends, all things in (His) Knowledge. (65:12)

He Who created the seven heavens one above another: No want of proportion wilt thou see in the Creation of (Allah) Most Gracious. So turn thy vision again: seest thou any flaw?
Again turn thy vision a second time: (thy) vision will come back to thee dull and discomfited, in a state worn out. And we have, (from of old), adorned the lowest heaven with Lamps, and We have made such (Lamps) (as) missiles to drive away the Evil Ones, and have prepared for them the Penalty of the Blazing Fire. (67:3–5)

“‘See ye not how Allah has created the seven heavens one above another, “And made the moon a light in their midst, and made the sun as a (Glorious) Lamp?” (71:15–16)

“And we pried into the secrets of heaven; but we found it filled with stern guards and flaming fires. ‘We used, indeed, to sit there in (hidden) stations, to (steal) a hearing; but any who listen now will find a flaming fire watching him in ambush.” (72:8–9)

“And (have We not) built over you the seven firmaments. And placed (therein) a Light of Splendour?” (78:12–13)

Behold! in the creation of the heavens and the earth; in the alternation of the night and the day; in the sailing of the ships through the ocean for the profit of mankind; in the rain which Allah Sends down from the skies, and the life which He gives therewith to an earth that is dead; in the beasts of all kinds that He scatters through the earth; in the change of the winds, and the clouds which they Trail like their slaves between the sky and the earth;- (Here) indeed are Signs for a people that are wise. (2:164)

Comment 3:
Please note the definition of the universe. As far as the quran is concerned, the universe consists of the earth and the seven heavens (that are crowned by the mighty throne) and whatever is between them. We have seen what else is in between them eg the only sun, the only moon and many many stars. Which shoot at jinns so that they cannot hear things the angels talk about in the lowest heaven. The idea is that the largest light in the whole of this quranic universe is the sun then moon. The stars are thought to be only small lamps just below the lowest heaven. Here one can also raise the question as to what are the signs the quran is talking about. Unless it is made clear what are we looking for, we cannot verify anything. The quran is in habit of saying, everything is a sign from god. It does not clarify as to how something is a sign from god or in which sense and how can it be verified as such? If one said, I am a doctor, look at that chicken there is a sign in it for you, what would the people make of it? How does looking at chicken prove that one is a doctor? So just by telling us look at this or that for no reason at all or for a reason other than verification would not prove anything. So each time the quran states anything as a sign, one must ask such questions to realise that in fact there are no signs. The text used is only to give impression of signs but not actual detail of signs.

Part 4:

“Hast thou not Turned thy vision to one who disputed with Abraham About his Lord, because Allah had granted him power? Abraham said: “My Lord is He Who Giveth life and death.” He said: “I give life and death”. Said Abraham: “But it is Allah that causeth the sun to rise from the east: Do thou then cause him to rise from the West.” Thus was he confounded who (in arrogance) rejected faith. Nor doth Allah Give guidance to a people unjust.” (2:258)

Comment 4:
Please note the science that Abraham has been taught by Allah according to the quran. He thinks that the sun rises from the east and so thinks it falls in the west. Allah is telling us about it very proudly and does not correct his mistake that it is not the sun that rises and falls but that this is how the people on the earth observe this phenomenon. The sun as compared to the flight of the earth around it is stationary. Its movement is only of importance when we talk about the movement of the whole solar system as compared to the rest of our galaxy. Because the idea at the time was that somebody eg an angel etc was moving the sun between the heaven and the earth hence the phenomenon of sunrise and sunset and so occurred this mistake.

Please read about the ancient concepts of the universe and all this will make perfect sense. It is because of this very concept that the author of the quran made such like statements as are found in the quran eg telling us that had allah wished he could have kept the night on the earth for ever or the day for that matter. Now those who know astronomy, know very well that the way the universe is, and in it our solar system is, it is impossible for such a thing to happen. For example, the only way to keep night permanently on the earth will be to remove the sun or its ability to shine. That will be the end of the solar system itself. Likewise to create permanent day on the earth will require more suns so that there is no darkness on the earth at all anywhere at any time. Or the earth will need to be made of some material that is clear so that sunlight gets through it everywhere, for night is result of earth’s own shadow on the other side that is not facing the sun.

As the earth rotates on its own axis the parts of the earth that were facing the sunlight before become dark and the parts that were dark now face the sunlight. The idea may be understood by experiment liking it to a person shining a beam of a torch on a football the while the football is being rotated at a constant speed in a dark room. There are many other implications if the earth was made of clear material eg that material may not have had the ability to give rise to living things. So the way things work is the only way they could be. In other words even if it was god who made this world yet he had to do it the best he could, for even god cannot be expected to not to do his best at the end of the day. Whichever way we look at this problem, it is a problem that the quran has landed itself into.

One must also note another point here about proof and proving. Abraham is looking for a proof from the infidel as regard his claim of being a god. He thinks that proof is necessary before anyone could accept anyone a god. Moreover he thinks that it should be in the power of god to make sun rise from the west ie god must be able to intervene directly. He also thinks that proof must be produced on demand, or he would not be right in asking for it. All this is backed by Allah because he is allegedly telling Abraham’s story with pride and the same is true in case of muhammad because he is given this message and he believes in it and thus backs it up. So if I ask my muslim brethren to furnish me with proof as to what they claim, it should not be anything out of the ordinary, should it? If we did not talk about proof and proving then anyone could claim anything and get away with it.

Since god can intervene directly according to the quran it creates a problem. How can we be asked to study nature if nature is not allowed to go its own natural way? Moreover if it was alright for god to make past people believe in him by showing miracles to them then why do we not need miracles from god or why would it be wrong for god to show similar miracles to us? According to the quran god’s way of doing things never changes and he does not like double standards 83/1–4 etc. So god will be in the wrong if he showed discrimination. If he was right to do things miraculously then, he is wrong to not to do them the same way now, for that will lead people to confusion. Likewise if he does things naturally now, he ought to do the same then or again people would have ended up confused. Consistency is vital for god or things would be chaotic ie not work out. So one can see how things are according to allegedly divine scriptures and in this case the quran.

Part 5:

“Hast thou not turned thy vision to thy Lord?- How He doth prolong the shadow! If He willed, He could make it stationary! then do We make the sun its guide.” (25:45)

Comment 5:
Again one can see that the author of the quran is not aware of how solar system works. The only way shadows could be made stationary is by stopping the earth from rotating on its own axis. What will happen if the earth was stopped from rotating? The solar system would collapse, because balance of the forces that are keeping the solar system functioning would be seriously altered from the state of its equilibrium leading to its destruction.

Part 6:

Say: See ye? If Allah were to make the night perpetual over you to the Day of Judgment, what god is there other than Allah, who can give you enlightenment? Will ye not then hearken?
Say: See ye? If Allah were to make the day perpetual over you to the Day of Judgment, what god is there other than Allah, who can give you a night in which ye can rest? Will ye not then see? (28:71–72)


“Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?” (21:30)

Comment 6:
The quran here clearly states that the heavens are as physically real as the earth. So my question is where are those seven heavens that were stuck with the earth, which allah had to separate? Where did they go after they were separated? Did they disappear into thin air the while the earth is still here and we are all living on it?

As for the quran, is this the origin of the universe or is it the origin of the solar system the verse is talking about or is it neither but repetition of ancient idea of what they thought the universe was? For in cosmology all most all people of the field accept the idea that the universe came to existence more than 20 billion years ago. This is not their view as to origin of the solar system. It is again an agreed fact that solar system is only about four billion years old. It was not part of the original creation of the universe but came to being later on as a result of secondary creation of which the author of the quran is completely unaware and so are those who claim to be scientists yet interpret the quran this way and follow it. To explain it for understanding, our solar system is child of a star of our galaxy called milky way. This star due to being unstable exploded instead of imploding and turning into a black hole. After explosion it turned into a cloud of gas and dust etc and as the cloud tried to disperse the acting forces fragmented it. These fragments due to interaction between themselves collapsed upon themselves giving rise to a new smaller star and its planets which we today call our solar system.

Now going back to what the verse says. The quran is clear that the throne, the seven heavens, the only greatest light in this quranic universe (the sun), the only lesser light in this quranic universe, (the moon), the small lamp lights (the stars) and the earth are the whole universe as far as the quran is concerned. This whole quranic universe was created by this quranic god namely Allah in six days who did not feel the need for rest as the jewish god jehova did. The problem here is that the heaven the quran is repeatedly talking about were created at the same time as the earth was. All things in the heavens and the earth were created at that very time. The quran clearly tells us that the god allah began this activity and did not rest but finalised it. Now the origin of the universe did not give rise to the earth and the creation of solar system nor did it give rise to seven heavens that were stuck to each other and were similar in nature of their material.

If the quran was word of real god, it would not have such clear cut mistakes in it. It shows that Allah is an imaginary god created by the author/s of the quran for his/their own purpose which if I had the time will be explained when I talk about Islamic constitution, Islamic society and politics. I cannot tackle each and everything in one go to show that true god should not be attributed with such faulty scriptures. Are we not afraid that we attribute such things to god as make god look ignorant to us? Who are we really trying to kid or why? Is it right for us to respect our holy books so much in the name of god but ignore the god himself? The quran further tells us that before god created the universe ie the seven heavens and the earth his throne was over the waters. Now where did the water come from if the universe was not even created yet? Moreover Allah is unaware of the fact that phenomenon of sunrise and sunset only occurs on planets and even planets have places where this phenomenon does not occur eg compare the equator with the poles. Elsewhere people are told to pray on time even when travelling. Since the phenomenon of time only occurs on planets and the space travelling was not thought of so attention was not paid to that aspect, showing that the quran was not written by real God but somebody who was not even aware of the poles. Facing the ka’ba during prayer is another such factor. Because when you are far far away from makkah, the earth curvature prevents you from facing the ka’ba 2/142,144 etc.


Part 7:

We created the heavens and the earth and all between them in Six Days, nor did any sense of weariness touch Us. Bear, then, with patience, all that they say, and celebrate the praises of thy Lord, before the rising of the sun and before (its) setting. (50:38–39)

He it is Who created the heavens and the earth in six Days — and His Throne was over the waters that He might try you, which of you is best in conduct. But if thou wert to say to them, “Ye shall indeed be raised up after death”, the Unbelievers would be sure to say, “This is nothing but obvious sorcery!” (11:7)

Be ye foremost (in seeking) Forgiveness from your Lord, and a Garden (of Bliss), the width whereof is as the width of heaven and earth, prepared for those who believe in Allah and His messengers: that is the Grace of Allah, which He bestows on whom he pleases: and Allah is the Lord of Grace abounding. (57:21)

A revelation from Him Who created the earth and the heavens on high. (Allah) Most Gracious is firmly established on the throne (of authority). To Him belongs what is in the heavens and on earth, and all between them, and all beneath the soil. (20:4–6)

Comment 7:

Here Allah clearly thinks that there is nothing out there outside the universe, for the heavens and the earth are the universe. There is no concept of anything being below the earth ie underneath it for the earth is as low as it can get and the heavens are as hight as they could be.

Part 8

Allah is He Who raised the heavens without any pillars that ye can see; is firmly established on the throne (of authority); He has subjected the sun and the moon (to his Law)! Each one runs (its course) for a term appointed. He doth regulate all affairs, explaining the signs in detail, that ye may believe with certainty in the meeting with your Lord.

And it is He who spread out the earth, and set thereon mountains standing firm and (flowing) rivers: and fruit of every kind He made in pairs, two and two: He draweth the night as a veil o’er the Day. Behold, verily in these things there are signs for those who consider!

And in the earth are tracts (diverse though) neighbouring, and gardens of vines and fields sown with corn, and palm trees — growing out of single roots or otherwise: watered with the same water, yet some of them We make more excellent than others to eat. Behold, verily in these things there are signs for those who understand! (13:2–4)

Those who sustain the Throne (of Allah) and those around it Sing Glory and Praise to their Lord; believe in Him; and implore Forgiveness for those who believe: “Our Lord! Thy Reach is over all things, in Mercy and Knowledge. Forgive, then, those who turn in Repentance, and follow Thy Path; and preserve them from the Penalty of the Blazing Fire! (40:7)

Comment 8:
The heavens are raised high without any pillars that you could see, which means there are pillars that you cannot see eg angels like the ones who carry the mighty throne. The problem here is that the heavens are not visible either ie we cannot see any heavens the quran is talking about as they are fully defined in the quranic text. So no wonder that imaginary heavens have imaginary pillars or vice versa.

Your Guardian-Lord is Allah, Who created the heavens and the earth in six days, and is firmly established on the throne (of authority): He draweth the night as a veil o’er the day, each seeking the other in rapid succession: He created the sun, the moon, and the stars, (all) governed by laws under His command. Is it not His to create and to govern? Blessed be Allah, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds! (7:54)


Part 9:

YUSUFALI: And We have made, above you, seven tracts; and We are never unmindful of (our) Creation. (23:17)

Comment 9:
As already has been commented the heavens are not below us but above us. Remember I said that heavens are domes or canopies so one can se where the quran is leading us in cosmology. The truth is there are no such heavens as the quran suggests. By now it should be clear as to where of the quran got its scientific information about cosmology. Which other book before it describes the things in almost exactly the same way? You guessed it, the holy bible in the old testament, in its very first book called genesis. The only difference is that the bible is telling us about all this in the beginning as a story and the quran is doing the same in many different lectures. Thus repetition became inevitable fact.

One should be able to see how the quran lists things in one lecture then expand on the listed items in another lecture and thereafter in another lecture. If one remembers what one read in one place then it is easy to collect similar information about things from all over the quran eg wherever the quran talks about the heavens and the earth, it is talking about exactly the same thing.

Part 10:

He Who created the heavens and the earth and all that is between, in six days, and is firmly established on the Throne (of Authority): Allah Most Gracious: ask thou, then, about Him of any acquainted (with such things). Blessed is He Who made constellations in the skies, and placed therein a Lamp and a Moon giving light; (25:59,61)


Comment 10:
One can see in verses like this that as for the quran, the sun is the only light in the quranic universe and only for the day just as the moon is the only light for the night in the quranic universe.


Part 11:

“Now cause a piece of the sky to fall on us, if thou art truthful!” (26:187)


Comment 11:

The quran is telling us that these heavens it is talking about are made of some solid stuff like the earth.


Part 12:

The heavens are almost rent asunder from above them (by Him Glory): and the angels celebrate the Praises of their Lord, and pray for forgiveness for (all) beings on earth: Behold! Verily Allah is He, the Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. (42:5)

And We have made the heavens as a canopy well guarded: yet do they turn away from the Signs which these things (point to)! (21:32)

Comment 12:
Again and again the quran is making wrong assumption that the sky is the solid heaven beyond which only angels live and human cannot go. I have not talked about the hadith yet but one looks at the story of prophet’s ascension to heavens, it becomes very clear that the quran is talking about the same heavens as the hadith. Some people dismiss the hadith yet think the quran is different but that is not the case.


Part 13:

The Day that We roll up the heavens like a scroll rolled up for books (completed),- even as We produced the first creation, so shall We produce a new one: a promise We have undertaken: truly shall We fulfil it. (21:104)

Even if We opened out to them a gate from heaven, and they were to continue (all day) ascending therein (15:14)

At it the skies are ready to burst, the earth to split asunder, and the mountains to fall down in utter ruin. (19:90)

The Day the heaven shall be rent asunder with clouds, and angels shall be sent down, descending (in ranks). (25:25)

“Or thou cause the sky to fall in pieces, as thou sayest (will happen), against us; or thou bring Allah and the angels before (us) face to face.” (17:92)

Seest thou not that Allah has made subject to you (men) all that is on the earth, and the ships that sail through the sea by His Command? He withholds the sky (rain) from failing on the earth except by His leave: for Allah is Most Kind and Most Merciful to man. (22:65)

Comment 13:
All these like verses are clear all by themselves as to what the author of the quran thinks about the sky.

Part 14:

“Now cause a piece of the sky to fall on us, if thou art truthful!” (26:187)

See they not what is before them and behind them, of the sky and the earth? If We wished, We could cause the earth to swallow them up, or cause a piece of the sky to fall upon them. Verily in this is a Sign for every devotee that turns to Allah (in repentance). (34:9)

It is Allah Who sustains the heavens and the earth, lest they cease (to function): and if they should fail, there is none — not one — can sustain them thereafter: Verily He is Most Forbearing, Oft-Forgiving. (35:41)

Were they to see a piece of the sky falling (on them), they would (only) say: “Clouds gathered in heaps!” (52:44)

By the Sky with (its) numerous Paths (51:7)

With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of pace. And We have spread out the (spacious) earth: How excellently We do spread out!
(51:47–48)


Comment 14:
There are quite a few verses that tell us about pieces of heavens falling down on the earth thus clearly showing that the heavens are solid in their structure that is capable of breaking into pieces. So the interpretations of the quran by people as take a verse and start explaining phenomenon as observed by scientific methods are completely wrong. So the question is, where are these heavens that are dome like above the earth which can fall down upon us if we do not believe in Allah? The answer is clear that the sky is mistaken for a solid heaven. Not only that but it is thought of as a canopy.

Part 15:

Yea, to Him be praise, in the heavens and on earth; and in the late afternoon and when the day begins to decline. (30:18)

Comment 15:
Here it is Allah speaking as he sees things happening himself. He observes the phenomenon that day is declining. Does it make sense? The sense here is clear that the sun is the only light for the heavens and the earth. If the phenomenon is said to be from human point of view from here on the earth then the quranic text itself is wrong because it is not making this clear.

8. By Hasan Imam: Response to Br. Mughal’s, ‘The Science and the Quran’ (dated 14th August 2003) — 11th November 2003

Br. Mughal,

Peace be with you. Hope you are well. I have responded to your thesis and the points are made below. I have numbered them. Beside the numbers I have summarised your argument, and then below each of your argument I have given my response. It is 7 pages long, so I suggest that you highlight your summarised arguments in bold in order to separate from my responses, and makes it more readable.

At the outset I would say that the arguments you have put forward are very weak, and is due to your misreading of Quranic verses that you highlighted. I would recommend that you read and view the following materials:

a) Re-read the book, ‘The Quran, the Bible and Science’ by Dr.Muarice Bucaille.
b) Book, ‘The Quran for Astronomy and Earth Exploration from Space’ by S. Waqar Ahmed Husaini
c) Video: ‘Is the Quran God’s Word?’ by Dr. Zakir Naik.
d) Video ‘ debate, ‘The Quran and the Bible in the light of history and science’. Dr. William Campbell (Christian) vs Dr. Zakir Naik (Muslim).

1. Regarding the shooting stars, you assert that shooting stars drive jinns away, so how can Jinns be affected by material things?

A few verses talk about stoning satans, this is a metaphorical statement when the Quran says that stars drive away satans. The Arabic word, ‘Rujum’ is used in such verses, which literally means throwing (something) like a stone, but metaphorically means ‘making something of guesswork’. This is in reference to Astrology, where deceivers use the stars to predict the future and these rebellious satans have been cursed. Their predictions are only guesswork, and the stars have been protected from the attributes that Astrologers give them, i.e. the power of knowing the future.


2. You stated that the Quranic idea of the universe is that the skies are domes on top of each other and solid built structures:

The Quran does not state that they are domes which are solid.

3. You asserted that the Quranic view of the heavens is that they are as solid as the earth itself and made of some other materials e.g. copper 55/37:

The Quran 55/7 gives no such indication that the heavens are made of copper and that they are solid.

4. You asserted that the Quranic view of the seven heavens was that these heavens were almost identical.

The Quran does not indicate such things. Seven in Arabic can also mean ‘several’. The Quranic description about seven heavens being one above the other is something that is yet to be verified by science. We have still scratched the surface about the structure of our universe, and 21st Century Cosmology is still at its infancy. When comparing the Quran with modern science, only confirmed scientific phenomenon are used, not theories. E.g. Quran mentions about life on other planets, but science has not verified this, hence this example is not used to test the Quran. Same with the structure of the universe.

5. You said that the Quranic description of the heavens is that they are all located above the earth and not below.

Your understanding is incorrect. The heavens would always be above the earth, wherever we are on this planet.

6. You said that the Quran believes the sky to be solid, a re-statement of points 2. and 3. above.

The Quran does not state that the sky is solid.

7. You said that the lowest heaven is thought to be solid because it has doors and windows.

The Quran does not say that the lowest heaven has doors and windows.

8. You then stated that pieces of the sky could break according to the Quran.

The Quran does not say that the sky is solid and that it breaks off.

9. You had asserted that the when the Quran talks about the heavens and what is ‘in between them’, you said that the only sun, the only moon and many many stars are the ones that are in between the heavens.

The Quran does not state that the sun, moon and stars are the only objects that are in between the heavens.

10. You assert that the largest light in the whole of this quranic universe is the sun and the moon.

The Quran does not state that the sun and the moon are the largest lights in the universe. You assert the same thing of the sun being the greatest light in the quranic universe further on. See point no. 20.

11. You said that the stars are considered to be small lamps

The Quran does not state that the lamps are small. You use the term ‘small lamps’ again further in your article. See point no. 21.

12. The chicken and the doctor:

You criticised the quranic use of the term, ‘signs’. The Quran refers to various aspects of the world and universe and encourages people to reflect on His creations as signs for people with understanding. Because you didn’t understand the signs, you therefore used a wrong analogy to provide an excuse for not understanding the signs. You said that if you were a doctor and told us to look at the chicken, that is a sign for us. You then asked if looking at a chicken implies that you are a doctor. The answer is no it doesn’t and it is a funny yet wrong analogy because the Quran doesn’t use such analogies.

13. You pointed to a verse 2.258 where Abraham (AS) was talking to an unbeliever who claimed he was god. Abraham (AS) said that God makes the sun rise from the East and he challenged the unbeliever to make it rise from the West. Your conclusion was that this is wrong since the sun does not literally rise from the East, it is stationary.

It is obvious that Abraham (AS) is talking from our perspective as we see it from Earth. Likewise, the stars appear as lesser lights (the Quran does not state this though, this is using your term, ‘small lamps’) from Earth, but from Betelgeuse, the Sun would appear to be a speck and Betelgeuse would appear as the brightest object. Likewise, although the heavens are above the earth, if we take the Shuttle to space and upside down, the earth is above the astronauts and the heavens are below them. It’s a matter of perspective. Same with the rising and setting of the sun. Even today we use the term ‘sunrise’ and ‘sunset’ even though we know it is not literally correct.

14. You stated that if Allah had wished, He could have kept the earth in darkness permanently and you referred to verse 28:71, 72. This you argue is wrong because in order to have perpetual darkness the sun would need to be removed, which is impossible. Or for there to be perpetual daylight there would need to be more than one suns.

Here, God is encouraging you to think about His bounty and mercy towards us. He said that if there was permanent darkness then which other god besides God could bring light? And if the earth had permanent daylight, who other than God could give night for rest? He is reasoning with us the benefits He has given us by creating Day and Night. He says in verse 28:73, ‘It is out of His Mercy that He has made for you the night and the day that you may rest therein and that you may seek of His Bounty (i.e. during the day) and in order you may be grateful’. Here God is reasoning with you as to why He created both day and night…unfortunately not many are grateful!

15. You stated that in the past it was alright for God to show miracles to the people, yet now it is not alright for God to show miracles. So, you state that in order for God to be consistent He should show miracles.

The Quran is a miracle which no one can produce the like thereof. You ask for a miracle and the miracle is there in front of you. If it is not a miracle, then produce a verse like it. The Quran states in 29:50–51, ‘And they say, ‘Why are not signs sent down to him from his Lord?’ Say, indeed, the signs are with Allah, and I am but a clear warner’. But is it not sufficient for them that We have sent down to you the Book which is rehearsed to them? Verily, in that is mercy and a reminder to people who believe’.

16. Regarding the prolonging of the shadow in 25:45, God says that if He willed, he could make the shadow stationary. Your reply was that this is not possible because if the Earth stopped rotating that would upset the balance of the Solar System which would in turn be destroyed.

I don’t know where you got this idea from that if a planet is stops rotating then that would alter the equilibrium and the solar system would collapse. Let us just digress here before answering your point. I don’t know how scientifically accurate your thesis is that if rotation is stopped, then the solar system would collapse. I have never heard of this theory so please refer me to the appropriate source.

The reason why planets rotate is the preservation of angular momentum that started from the time they were formed from the parent star. Larger mass planets rotate faster than smaller mass since larger mass would have larger momentum. Your idea of the solar system collapsing because of suspended rotation cannot be right, although I am willing to stand corrected, because it sounds illogical. Reasons being:

1) Most planets in our system rotate in the same direction, except for Venus and Uranus. Reason why these two planets rotate in the opposite direction is that collisions were thought to have taken place that reversed their rotations. If rotation is reversed, then it stands to reason that there was a time when the planets stopped rotating before changing direction. Yet the solar system did not collapse.

2) If you look at the rings of Saturn, they were formed when a moon(s) got too close to the planet and exploded. This is when the moon crosses the ‘Roche Radius’. Let me explain. There are two forces acting on a moon. The tidal forces of the parent planet that tries to rip it apart, and the moon’s own gravitational force that keeps the moon together. There is a minimum distance between the parent planet and its moon, which if it crosses, then the tidal forces of the parent planet overcome the moon’s gravitational force, thus the moon explodes. That is how the rings of Saturn (known as the Cassini Division) were formed. It also stands to reason that when the moon exploded, it obviously stopped rotating! Yet this did not lead to the collapse of Saturn’s system (it has other moons orbiting it). Jupiter and Uranus have rings as well, yet the Jovian systems are in great shape.

3) If you say that that the solar system collapses when rotation of a body stops, then it stands to reason that if a rate of rotation of a body slows down, then it will have some effect on the solar system. Earth’s rotation have slowed down over the last millions of years due to the pull of the Moon. Scientists state that millions of years ago, the typical earth day was 15–20 hrs long, and now it is nearly 24 hrs long. Given that the rate of rotation of planets can change, then according to your logic, the solar system would be affected. But it hasn’t. Likewise, when comet Shoemaker Levy-9 collided with Jupiter a decade ago, it would have slowed down the rotation rate, yet the solar system did not collapse.

Once we have established that rotation has little to do with the state of the solar system (again, I could be wrong) what keeps the solar system from collapsing? Reason is that all the planets and moons have orbits. This means that a planet is ‘falling’. Normally when something falls, it hits the ground due to gravity. However, a planet that circles the sun is falling, at the same rate it is trying to go off on a tangent. The net effect is that it falls around the Sun, and the moons fall around the parent planets. The solar system would collapse if the orbits of the planets decayed and fell into the sun, and the orbits would decay if the speed of revolution around the sun slowed down. This has nothing to do with rotation.

This was a digression. The real point is that the verse says, ‘If He willed, He coupled make it stationery…’. In Arabic, there are three different words for ‘if’. You have, ‘ida’ which means there is a possibility, ‘in’ which means its an achievable hypothesis, and ‘lau’, which means an unachievable hypothesis. The Arabic word used here is ‘lau’ which means it is not achievable.

17. You asserted that the seven heavens were stuck with the Earth which Allah separated (21:30). You then asked where the heavens and earth went after separation, did the heavens disappear?

The verse, 21:30 says “Do not the unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?”

The earth and heavens were one ‘unit of creation’. The Arabic word used is ‘ritqa’ which means one entity. And the Arabic word, ‘fataqa’ is used to mean split, rent asunder etc. This verse is factually correct and refers to the Big Bang when the universe was one fireball (wrong word I know) which exploded and the matter cooled to form galaxies and other matter. The Quran is correct when it says that the Earth and Heavens were joined and then were rent asunder. The verse is asking the Atheist to think and ponder. If the Quran was accurate in possessing this information which was only discovered in the 20th Century, won’t you then believe that the Quran is from the Creator? Again, this should be a ‘sign’ for those who think.

18. You said that the Solar system is 4 billion years old and the universe 20 billion years old, hence the solar system could not have been part of that early universe because it is a secondary creation.

This is wrong. All stellar materials that exist in the universe today were part of the same mass in the early universe. Materials can transform later, hence some materials cooled down to form galaxies, whereas other materials didn’t (and possibly formed dark matter…but that’s a theory). Whether the materials went to form secondary creations or tertiary creations is irrelevant because all the materials were part of the same mass. Let’s say that the Earth came from the Sun, a secondary creation, and the Moon came from the Earth, a tertiary creation. The materials that made the Moon were from the Sun.

19. On the same theme as above, you gave a possible explanation of the origins of our solar system. You said that our system was formed from remains of gas clouds (from a previously exploded star) which fragmented and these fragments collapsed on themselves to form the Sun and planets.

This has nothing to do with the Quran, but I thought I would reply to this because this is interesting as well. You have stated only one of the two theories. You cited the ‘Monistic’ theory which states that the solar system was created from gas clouds. One part of the Monistc theory states that the planets formed from these clouds at the same time the sun was formed. Another part of the Monistic theory states that the planets were formed after the formation of the Sun, from the remaining gas clouds. However, there is the ‘Dualistic’ theory that states that a star (called Nemesis) passed by and drew out the materials from the Sun that formed planets. Science has yet to ascertain how the planets were formed, but I would opt for the Dualistic theory. The reason being that the angular momentum (rotation) of the planets must have come from somewhere, bodies just don’t rotate on their own. The angular momentum of the planets must have come from the Sun, i.e. the Sun’s rotation was passed on to them when they separated from the Sun. Furthermore, the outer part of the sun is gaseous and less gaseous as you go towards the Sun’s centre. Given that the outer planets, i.e. Neptune, Uranus, Saturn and Jupiter are gas giants and the inner planets, Mars, Earth, Venus and Mercury are more solid, indicates that the planets came from the Sun. That’s just my view and I am open to correction.

I agree with the idea that our Sun/Solar System came from an exploded star. The reason being that the amount of energy that is needed to make an atom of iron exceeds the total energy of our present Solar system. The only way that iron and some other elements could be created was from an extraordinary force, which in turn could only come from a supernova. The Quran said that God ‘sent down’ iron, i.e. it isn’t part of our Solar System, which is true! Here is a sign for you.

20. This is a repetition of point no. 10 above where you state that the Sun is the greatest light in the Quranic Universe.

As mentioned, the Quran does not state this.

21.You stated that the Quran says that all things in the heavens and the Earth were created at that very time (i.e. beginning of the universe).

The Quran does not state this.

22. You stated that Allah’s Throne was over the waters before the creation of the universe, so you ask where the water came from before the creation of the universe. You cited verse 11:7

The verse does not indicate in any way that the ‘Throne over the waters’ was before the creation of the universe!

23. You assert that God wasn’t aware of space travel and poles etc. because how can we pray at the right times in space or if we are on the Earth’s poles?

God did know about space travel and he has stated this in the Quran and Man would achieve this one day. With regards to prayers, Islamic law does allow ijtihad. Someone asked Muhammad (S) if the Quran doesn’t have an answer to a problem where does he turn to? The answer was the hadith, if not then the scholars, if not then your own judgement.

You also indicated that we would be facing the Kaaba if we are far away from Makkah because of the curvature of the Earth. This is a red herring. Are we praying towards space then? The Kaaba is a symbolic focal point for all Muslims representing the brotherhood of Man and the Oneness of God.

24. You said that Allah thinks there is nothing outside the universe.

This is factually wrong. There is no such thing as ‘outside the universe’ because this denotes space outside the universe. Space is a creation and was created when the universe was formed. Hence to talk about being ‘outside’ the universe is invalid. In any case, Allah does not state that there is nothing outside the universe.

25. Pillars of heavens? The Quran states that there are no pillars that we can see. You responded by stating that there must be pillars we cannot see.

The Quran is correct when it states that there are no pillars we can see. There is nothing unscientific about this. If you want to read into the verse and conclude therefore that there must be pillars we cannot see we can do that. Pillars hold up structures. In the case of the universe, what is holding the galaxies, and planets together? Gravity, which we cannot see.

26. Again you assert as you did in another thread that the Bible tells stories and Quran gives lectures.

What is the difference between story telling and lecture deliverance? This is a puzzling explanation of the difference between the Quran and the Bible. regarding creation, you state that the Quran and Bible talk about the creation in the same way. They don’t. Re-read the book, ‘The Bible, The Quran and Modern Science’. And also refer to the video debate, ‘The Quran and the Bible in the light of history and Science’ debate between Dr. William Campbell (Christian) and Dr. Zakir Naik (Muslim).

27. Again, you state that the Quran views the Sun to be the only light in the Quranic universe. See point no, 10 and 20 above.

For the third time, the Quran does not state this.


28. You cited verse 26:187, ‘Now cause a piece of the sky to fall on us, if thou art truthful!’. You therefore state that the Quran considers the sky to be solid.

Reading the context of the verse, it was the unbelievers who demanded from Muhammad (S) to cause a piece of the sky to fall. They demanded this from him because they thought he was bewitched and a liar. It was the unbelievers who made the demand. The Quran does not state that the sky is solid.

29. Later you asserted that the heaven is solid, beyond which humans cannot go.

Again, the Quran does not state that the heavens are solid. And nowhere did Allah say that humans cannot go to the heavens. In fact, it is the opposite, as verse 55:33 states, ‘O assemblies of Jinns and Men, if you can penetrate the regions of the heavens and earth then penetrate them! You will not penetrate them save with a power”. the ‘if’ that is used here in Arabic is ‘in’ which means it is a possible hypothesis. And the Arabic verb ‘nafada’ means to go in an come out of the other side of the regions in question (see Bucaille). Thus, interstellar space travel is a possibility, give it another 200–300 yrs.

30. You quoted verse 52:44 where Allah states that if the unbelievers were to see a piece of the sky falling on them, they would merely say, ‘Clouds gathered in heaps!’

Remember that the unbelievers demanded Muhammad (S) to make a piece of the sky fall. In this verse Allah is informing us about the ungratefulness of unbelievers. Even if Allah were to yield to their request of a piece of sky falling, Allah explains how a piece of sky would fall, i.e. if clouds fell on them. Even though God may have acceded to their request, their obstinacy would get the better of them and still reject the signs by saying that these are clouds gathered in heaps! This is the arrogance of the unbeliever, when a sign is shown to them in plain view, they would find excuses to deny it. A real example is the miracle of the Quran where no one can produce a verse like it, although people have tried. Even though the miracle is staring at us in the face, the unbelievers only give excuses for not taking up the challenge. Again, the verse does not indicate that the sky is solid.

31. You quoted verses which describe the earth being covered by a canopy, thus indicating that the sky is thought of as solid.

Again, the Quranic universe does not consider the sky to be solid. There are verses that state that the earth has a guarded canopy or protected roof. This is correct. The atmosphere is divided into four sections, the Troposphere, the Stratosphere, the Mesosphere and the Thermosphere. The atmosphere does protect the inhabitants from damaging UV light and small meteors, most of which burn up in the atmosphere. We have electro-magnetic fields that redirect the harmful Solar Wind when the Sun experiences Solar Flares. If there was no atmosphere, then the Earth would end up looking like the moon, full of craters. Again, these verses should be signs for you, there is knowledge about the protective roof of the Earth, which only modern science has established. Who could have revealed this other than the Creator? Here is another sign for you.

Conclusion

Over a decade ago in Saudi Arabia, a medical conference was held and non-Muslim scientists were invited to discuss about the Quran and Modern Science. They were astonished about the compatibility of the Quran with Modern Scientific data. One Scientist from Thailand heard one verse of the Quran relating to the skin and he became a Muslim. There are people who would need 10 signs. Yet there are others who even though a hundred signs were given, would never believe instead they would reject clear signs and would want to see God face to face and God has informed us about the mentality of these unbeliever. How many signs do you need?

Peace

9. Response from Br. Mughal — 25th Nov 2003

Dear friends, greetings. Nice discussion going on here.
Brother Hasan thank you for your response.

I think the problem seems to be in understanding the categories of truth and the definitions of various terms eg theory, hypothesis, axiom, proof etc etc as well as their interrelation.

For example, if I ask you to define the four categories of truth and what is difference between them, would you be able to? Could you be able to state reasons as to why the truth may be categorised into these categories? Could you explain the relationship between the terms as mentioned by me as well as the terms and their use?

I am sure that if we could understand these things properly then we can come to some sort of conclusion as well. This is something that we will all would find educational.

I hope that you have the time for it. Anyway, love and happiness.

10. Response by Me 25th Nov 2003

Br. Mughal,

Thanks for your reply and for your kind words. Your points about categorisation of truth is interesting, but puzzling. We are now delving into the world of philosophy and logic.

In your initial article on the Quran and Science and my subsequent response, we didn’t have the need to venture into the 4 categories of truth. In your initial article you tried to highlight mistakes in the Quran, e.g. that the Quranic sky or universe is solid. So you tried to prove that certain Quranic verses were false by basing them on observable data (truth?) that the sky is not solid. In other words, 1) ‘The Sky is not solid’ = True, 2) ‘The Quran says the sky is solid’ = False

Your conclusion of statement 2 being false, is based on statement 1 being true (although I stated that the Quran actually does not state that the sky is solid). Likewise, the statement, ‘The Earth Revolves around the Sun’ is either True or False. We can all accept that the statement is true, and then seek to discuss it. However, I would be interested to know what the 4 categories of truth are in relation to this statement.

Your initial article already has the inbuilt assumption of what truth is, which then enabled you to try to prove the Quran false based on these truths e.g. (the Sky is not solid, the Universe is not made of Copper, the Solar system was a result of a Supernova from a previous star etc. etc.). After doing that and my subsequent response, you now raise the issue of defining truth and categorising them (which you did implicitly in your initial article) without really dealing with my response to your article.

Likewise, on another thread, we discussed about the Quran where you asserted that if certain verses in the Quran do agree with modern science, we cannot state that it is necessarily true because other verses pertaining to Heaven, Hell, angels etc. have not yet been proven. I then sought to disprove that claim. But then you said that we don’t know why people believe what they believe because we do not know how the brain works! In other words, because we don’t know how the brain works, we cannot really know why people believe what they believe, and by implication, we cannot know whether the Quran (or religion) is true or not. The fallacy of this argument is that you had already tried to prove religion to be false even though you didn’t know how the brain worked! So by raising the issue of the human brain later in the discussion, I would surmise is a tangential issue side-tracking the main topic at hand….a failure deal with the arguments facts presented in our previous discourse. Same with the truth argument. By questioning its definition and categorisation late in our discourse is a side-track and a failure to deal with the arguments and facts presented in response to your initial article.

Whilst we can venture into the world of axioms, hypotheses, theories, truth etc. we can do so after we have finished what you had started, namely dealing with the Quran and its corroboration with scientific facts/data/truth(?) (and not hypotheses/theories).

Peace and love to you and your family as well.

11. By Hasan — 29th Nov 2003

Br. Mughal.

Peace, love and happiness to you. You had started a new thread on testing religion. I assume therefore that our dialogue here has ended?

End of dialogue.

— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Disclaimer: The views expressed are mine only and do not belong to the company I work for or the political party I belong to.

Author Biography

Hasan Ali Imam was born in Bangladesh in 1972 and brought up in the UK. He has engaged in respectful debate and dialogue with those which disagree with him, which culminated in his candidacy for the British Parliament in 2005. He continues to be involved with the UK Conservative Party in his spare time whilst working for a multinational corporation. Hasan has also been involved with the UK Government’s PREVENT counter terrorism strategy as a trainer to public servants on how to prevent young people from venturing into extremism. He also draws on his own experience of attempted recruitment by extremist groups in the 1990s. Hasan has authored three books.

Firstly, ‘United States of Anger — Why Linda Sarsour’s Rage and Far Left Violence Cannot Move Mountains.’ This book is a response to Linda Sarsour (an American Palestinian Socialist activist), and her far left compatriots who supported the violence and rampage that took hold in the US after the tragic killing of George Floyd.

Secondly, ‘BAME — Breaking Through Barriers.’ This book deals with the race space in the UK. It responds to critics who state that ethnic minorities have not progressed due to institutional racism. He tackles the issue head on and invites critics to dialogue and debate. This book was praised by the British Government.

Thirdly, ‘Aisha and Fatima — Ladies of Heavan. A Sunni Response to Shiaism.’ This is specific to the main Islamic sects of Sunni and Shia. The book captures dialogues that Hasan (a Sunni) had with Shia Muslims over the last 20 years.

A fourth book project is under way for publication in 2023, entitled, ‘Why the Far Right are Far Wrong.’ Yes, you guessed it. It includes responses to the Far Right and dialogue with some of its members.

Hasan has also written an article on ‘Medium.com’ to challenge the anti-vaccine narrative from his own Conservative side, including Dr. Simone Gold in the US, and has invited dialogue and debate with anti-vaxxers. He has also engaged in dialogue with and Israeli Jew and an anti-Israeli Muslim on the State of Israel and the importance of Jews, Christians and Muslims to unite under the Abrahamic brotherhood.