Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
Ok I did not pick the right words.
My question was why when religious and secular talk, logic says secular should laugh it off.
Or not pay attention. What I observer in real life and here a certain tension on the part of secular people.
Perhaps some day I would know why is that.
Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
I do not disagree or assert that these do not exist is quran. My only point is that if it exists it should have been discovered before the guy in white coat said it. You have mentioned that you have read these statements yourself. In a way aren't you belittling your forefathers who could not understand the simple things that you were able to understand so clearly.
Ok, I make final attempt, giving you befit of the doubt that you honestly think we can help you see the way see things.
See we did not know, Shakespeare called working bee male soldiers. But God made bee, he inspired them to transfer navigation information. So when God had to mentioned bee working he picked the right gender "female"
You can not blame God for all knowing. Can you ?
See we did not know, that ant talked to each other. But he made them, ants spoke to each other on one occasion God heard them!! so When he mentioned, he said what happened.
Again he made ants, You can not blame him for knowing.
Again we did not know, when God mentioned that milk is created at the point where blood and faeces meet.
But he made the Cow so he could not help knowing it!! Can you blame him for that???
Again, when earth swallow some one at time of mosses., its was not me or you. So we did not see earth from inside.
Only people being swallows saw it, Again God could not help know it, since he made it!!!(exact description according to geologist, in fact one converted after reading it )
When he said water has boundaries, he again knew. Since he made it.
He just use those thing so people who reflect can get advice.
Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
Ok I did not pick the right words. My question was why when religious and secular talk, logic says secular should laugh it off. Or not pay attention. What I observer in real life and here a certain tension on the part of secular people.
Perhaps some day I would know why is that.
Because it is not a laughing matter when laws are made based on religion. Because it is not a laughing matter when the govt dictates to you if you can call yourself a Muslim or not. Because it is not a laughing matter when the govt criminalizes certain orientations. Because it is not a laughing matter when the law punishes adultery with death. Because it is not a laughing matter when x number of witnessess needed for rape to he even considered.
These laws SHOULD mane decent folks OUTRAGED.
Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
I see your point.
1-why would some one wanted to be called muslim so badly ?
when not muslim, in pakistan, you get to more stuff, fornication drinking with out being charged.
2-4 witness are needed to blame a women for her bad character. If 3 people saw her doing PDA its not enough to consider her lose.
Who do you think own a society, southies ??
Also please remember, secular trying to fix the world have been the most ruthless people on the planet so far.
Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
I see your point.
1-why would some one wanted to be called muslim so badly ? when not muslim, in pakistan, you get to more stuff, fornication drinking with out being charged.
Well what kind of an argument is that? If a person considers HIMSELF Muslim, it is nit the govts business. It is all none of anyone else's business why that person would want to call themselves Muslims. 2-4 witness are needed to blame a women for her bad character. OK. I stand corrected. But it is NOT the govts business to punish adultery. It is between the woman her famiky an her God ( If she is religious). If 3 people saw her doing PDA its not enough to consider her lose. What is PDA. Personal digital assistant? Who do you think own a society, southies ?? The people. The govt is there to simply serve the people.
Also please remember, secular trying to fix the world have been the most ruthless people on the planet so far.
The above principles I laid out are NOT the reasons for wars. They are simply secular principles. Have there been wars under Secular govts. Yes. Is it BECAUSE they were secular? No.
Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
And who is southies, Mr. Monk?
Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
And who is southies, Mr. Monk?
its royal southie :D
Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
They are simply secular principles. Have there been wars under Secular govts. Yes. Is it BECAUSE they were secular? No.
Have there been problem under Muslim govts. Yes. Is it BECAUSE they were Muslim? No
I would would wet my pants dealing with religious nut cases.
But secular anger and revenge is, like a millions angles of death unleashed on millions of people.
l
Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
I ddidnt bring up wars and their dependance on govt being secular or otherwise. I was simply stating that secular principles ffight for equality for all. Regardless of faith and orientation. Same simply is not the case when laws based on religion.
Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
Even on bad hair day Muslims society dont have those issue, of which seculars are trying to impose solution on us.
Its the arrogance the deal us with :(
Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
Its true that Muslims (laymen) would re-interpret Islamic texts to coincide with scientific theories but I wouldn't expect this from Scholars. From what I have heard Imam Ahmad Raza Khan believed the Sun and the planets revolve around the Earth rather then the other way round as the scientific theory states. His position, based on his interpretation of the Religious Texts, has not been refuted by scientists because apparently they'll need a third reference point to be able to establish the actual truth of the matter
This reference point to merely establish what revolves around what is an impossibility to establish because we will need to know the limits of our existence before we can find such a reference point! and then be there (outside the limits of our existence) to look back to see what revolves around what!
So based on that I theorize that science isn't actually going anywhere anytime soon. Science is a very assuming theory
The blind following of scientific theories shouldn't be encouraged because we the common people are not even able to differentiate between theories and facts, unless of course Science is a religious group
Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
Hey, calm down guys. I think the topic of the thread has already been dealt with. isn't it?
Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
Everyone is calm here. No worries. As for whether the topic has been dealt with or not, I think the flow of the thread would probably be the best indicator.
To me the discussion is just getting started. Room for more actors to participate and weigh in. There doesn't appear to be a need to declare the topic as being addressed. Or not.
As long as folks are weighing in respectfully, it is all good isn't it.
Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
.
Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
The real problem is not science nor scriptures but lack of proper purposeful education and training. There is need for a proper all out debate but that is not going to happen tomorrow because world is not ready for it yet. The reason is people are not willing to listen what needs to be understood. If you told religious folks that religions are all rubbish because they have been invented by rulers, mullahs and money lenders as an alternative to kick out deen of Allah to exploit masses they will not accept that. They cannot differentiate between a proper way of life for mankind in form of a proper human community based upon guidance of Allah and a system of dogmatic make beliefs based upon blind faith. Likewise if you told scientists that you are arguing against religions and mullahs not scriptures and the way the that tells you to live properly they have not yet developed enough sense to understand that either. So the person who really has a bit better understanding of the situation is stuck in the middle for the time being till both sides fight it out and realise that they both are going the wrong round after a lot of death and destruction.
The study of origin of language and how it works in depth will show that scriptural interpretations are incorrect. It is because these scriptural interpretations were carried out with an objective in mind or on basis of ignorance ie a) rulers, mullahs and money lenders worked together to use scriptures as tools to manipulate masses and b)people ignorant of real world realities interpreted them as per their make beliefs that have no foundation in reality.
However all this was done in ignorance not knowingly and deliberately because mankind were never clever enough to know things in detail the scriptures required them to know. Humans are born not knowing anything and they take ages to learn things and on top of that they are manipulated by each other and taken in different direction due to their narrow mindedness. Now people have to be narrow minded because there is very little information in those minds which expands minds. The less in the sack the less its expansion and the more in the sack the more it expands. The mind is not much different from that ie the more information you put in your mind the more it is able to look at things in depth and width.
The whole purpose of Allah by sending messengers and scriptures was to draw attention of people to important points and issues where man will otherwise not look for a very very long time if he was not stimulated externally. I mean if your senses did not draw your mind into thinking then mind will have nothing to think about. This is why science and scriptures from Allah are two eyes for man to see the world in which he lives properly. It is like if you only had only one eye then you could not gauge the distance between two objects at a distance. Likewise if you had only one ear then you could not determine direction of the sound and various other aspects of it.
Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
Ok, I make final attempt, giving you befit of the doubt that you honestly think we can help you see the way see things.
See we did not know, Shakespeare called working bee male soldiers. But God made bee, he inspired them to transfer navigation information. So when God had to mentioned bee working he picked the right gender "female" You can not blame God for all knowing. Can you ?
See hundred years down the line(or more) , people would be able to exactly predict when a earthquake would occur at what place. Would you be able to read the holy text and give us this information now. When this discovery is made there would be people who claim that this information was present in the Holy book and it was hidden from the normal eye. Do you see the fallacy of this argument.
Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
Have there been problem under Muslim govts. Yes. Is it BECAUSE they were Muslim? No
I would would wet my pants dealing with religious nut cases. But secular anger and revenge is, like a millions angles of death unleashed on millions of people. l
This is a very different topic from what is being discussed. Though from what i can infer from your statement is that there are no Muslim govts for the past 100 years. If there was a system which God ordained why aren't there leaders who can implement it in the present day.
Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
Nope, don't want to discuss it. There is Google. Use it. I am not going to provide you names of scientists who did what and for how long. Besides, I don't want another ban.
Very well then ... until then ... this statement of yours
*If a discovery contradicts religious texts, it is simply dismissed.
Is wrong until you can prove otherwise.*
Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
There is absolutely no harm if these are one off instances. Let me just say that there are 2 friends who go to a hotel to eat. If one friend is made to pay the bill always it is easy to infer that the other friend is just using his friend. If the other friend pays the bill once in a while the relationship seems more equitable.
Similarly if there are instances if any Holy book could claim a scientific discovery before the scientists in white coat make it then it is credible. Otherwise it is just that we are interpreting the Holy book in a manner that is meaningful to the discovery that is made.
Peace HeadStrong
Your analogy does not work ... 2 friends go to eat - infers that both the friends are intending to do the same thing ... whereas science and scripture are not both "metaphorically going to eat" - science always goes to eat and scripture always goes to drink ... in other words scripture provides signs to point at truth ... whereas science seeks to measure objective reality. A sign can never tell us what science discovery can tell us ... it can only concur with science once it is discovered.
Re: Scientific validation of religious texts
Here is a verse from the holy Quran that points out a fact unknown to the mankind earlier
25:31) Do not the disbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were a closed-up mass, then We opened them out? And We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?
The above verse points out a very basic fact that life without water is impossible. Water is an important ingredient in all life forms.There has to be water before sign of any life-form. Whenever, scientists try to look for evidence of life in other planets, they first of all try to determine the presence of water over there. There could be life form that can exist in absence of air but not without water.