Scientific validation of religious texts

[Southie]

Re: Scientific validation of religious texts

@psyah

Peace HeadStrong





The Holy Scripture of the Qur’an consists of certain styles of sentences - each are called ‘sign’ in Arabic. Ayah (singular), Ayaat (plural).





So what is a sign?





let’s say I’m travelling to Karachi from Lahore by road … In order to get there I follow the road signs. Some signs tell me which lane to get in, some tell me how far the place is I need to get to, but by reaching a signpost it does not mean I have reached my destination yet … In the same way when we read and understand the ayaat of the Qur’an we must not confuse them with the destination of the meaning held behind them. So in this way although I agree with you science of the subject matter is not explained like a textbook, but to infer scientifically verifiable data can go against the signs of the Qur’an is false … At least for a Muslim. In other words what is provable and proven to be true, it is impossible to show that the opposite is alluded to in the Qur’an.





Signs are of various categories and can occupy several at the same time:





Responses

Disclosures

Warnings

Encouragements

Narrative (Literal)

Metaphors

Instructions









Disclosures are a group of signs that provide information about what we previously did not know or realise. These can happen at subjective levels and objective levels. They can also be verifiable and non-verifiable.





Of the disclosures that are verifiable … We see no problem in using science or relating to discoveries by science to show - as a sign - the verses are from God. As God must Know Truth.





Now the disclosure of Jinn … We are told of their existing as unseen, so we cannot verify their existence, but for the creation of man, some aspects are verifiable and others are not. So let’s study the verses (one of which is reproduced below) and see if it carries scientific compatibility … And that is as far as we take it … To realise that such information not being available in a previous era … When the Qur’an was revealed is a ‘sign’ of its truth.





Surah 96: Sign (verse) 2



Sahih International translation

Created man from a clinging substance.



The word here is 'alaq … It is like a planted growth that takes support and nourishment from the place it is appended to … This is the dictionary definition. It has been used with reference to plants as well or even parasites … Leeches clinging and drawing blood. It can also mean a congealing that a mixtures of liquids coagulates and sticks together.



If this statement is not scientific, (or let me say verifiable) then what type of statement is it? And by looking at the verse in this way … What is inherently wrong in finding scientific congruency in the scriptures after the discovery is made scientifically?

Lot of text. Here is the highlight

“In other words what is provable and proven to be true, it is impossible to show that the opposite is alluded to in the Qur’an.”

What a low bar you have set, sir. It is not enough to show beyond reasonable doubt that the Quran simply has not predicted all the scientific inventions. Now scientists must show that the OPPOSITE OF ALL INVENTIONS are alluded to in the Quran?

Seriously?