The Balance of Science and Religion

[IsaidwhatIsaid]

Religion itself came about to explain natural phenomena that could not be explained centuries ago and to create a moral code for people to follow. Many religions are set in stone in their beliefs and do not offer much room for revision. Science can present itself in a way that may be similar to religion where the findings cannot be questioned because they may be seen as the “objective truth.” However, with the different sciences there are always efforts to know more about subjects to get an accurate picture of the world around us so there is always room for revision once there is proof (after many repeated experiments) of a new breakthrough in understanding different processes. However, pseudoscience and biases people bring in can get in the way of it.

With religion, it plays an important part in society. It is tied in with culture and it gives people a sense of unity and people can revolve their identities around religion. Even if certain concepts in religion are set in stone, people will still find a way to make their religion work with their cultural beliefs so even religion is not completely static around the world. However, there are always efforts to practice a more “purified” version of religion that is true to when the religious texts were first published.

How do you suppose people go about possible dilemmas that arise from science and religion? Do you think that people should stick by “pure” religious beliefs no matter what even if the beliefs contradict what is being proven with science?

[Obama]

Re: The Balance of Science and Religion

How do you suppose people go about possible dilemmas that arise from science and religion? Do you think that people should stick by “pure” religious beliefs no matter what even if the beliefs contradict what is being proven with science?

Interesting questions, I assume you are a science oriented person and believe firmly in the theory of Evolution!

I heard lectures by Carl Sagan American astronomer, cosmologist, astrophysicist, astrobiologist, author, science popularizer, and science communicator in astronomy and other natural sciences.

He stated in his lecture on Evolution in his opinion very clear steps how life developed from single cell life forms do you know about that?

[IsaidwhatIsaid]

Re: The Balance of Science and Religion

@Obama

Interesting questions, I assume you are a science oriented person and believe firmly in the theory of Evolution!

I heard lectures by Carl Sagan American astronomer, cosmologist, astrophysicist, astrobiologist, author, science popularizer, and science communicator in astronomy and other natural sciences.

He stated in his lecture on Evolution in his opinion very clear steps how life developed from single cell life forms do you know about that?

I haven’t studied in depth how organisms evolved from single celled organisms to multicellular organisms, but I know it has happened. It makes sense as well if you look deeper into some organelles inside cells. I do know the general basics of the theory of evolution and I definitely agree with it. Until a new solid breakthrough is revealed that utterly debunks the idea of theory of evolution I will continue to support it.

[Obama]

Re: The Balance of Science and Religion

Carl in his lecture has said that it all started from a single cell life form then through some plausible steps in between it became a Worm like creature had No eyes but crawling on its belly, feeling its way around its environment!

Now the next step in animal life evolution from worms according to Carl Sagan; do know what it was?

I can not tell you because you should do your own research!

[IsaidwhatIsaid]

Re: The Balance of Science and Religion

@Obama

Carl in his lecture has said that it all started from a single cell life form then through some plausible steps in between it became a Worm like creature had No eyes but crawling on its belly, feeling its way around its environment!

Now the next step in animal life evolution from worms according to Carl Sagan; do know what it was?

I can not tell you because you should do your own research!

When I get around to doing my own independent research I probably will look more deeply into the known early stages of life.

The sequence seems to be from a unicellular organism to a smaller multicellular organism eventually leading up to more diverse life forms because of Earth’s conditions. All organisms have one common unicellular ancestor that inhabited the ocean. Land based life forms came later.

[Captain_Obvious]

Re: The Balance of Science and Religion

@IsaidwhatIsaid

Religion itself came about to explain natural phenomena that could not be explained centuries ago and to create a moral code for people to follow. Many religions are set in stone in their beliefs and do not offer much room for revision. Science can present itself in a way that may be similar to religion where the findings cannot be questioned because they may be seen as the “objective truth.” However, with the different sciences there are always efforts to know more about subjects to get an accurate picture of the world around us so there is always room for revision once there is proof (after many repeated experiments) of a new breakthrough in understanding different processes. However, pseudoscience and biases people bring in can get in the way of it.

With religion, it plays an important part in society. It is tied in with culture and it gives people a sense of unity and people can revolve their identities around religion. Even if certain concepts in religion are set in stone, people will still find a way to make their religion work with their cultural beliefs so even religion is not completely static around the world. However, there are always efforts to practice a more “purified” version of religion that is true to when the religious texts were first published.

How do you suppose people go about possible dilemmas that arise from science and religion? Do you think that people should stick by “pure” religious beliefs no matter what even if the beliefs contradict what is being proven with science?

As a believer/follower of Islam, I believe in the oneness of Allah and in His being free of any deficiency. With that, I believe that His knowledge is absolute/perfect while ours isn’t. He knows many things that we might never know. Having said that, I’m not sure what you mean by dilemmas arising from science and religion, but the first example that comes to mind is that not too long ago, people would say that red wine is beneficial using science as a basis. Now, being a Muslim, just because it supposedly had some basis in science, this would not push me to consume it as it went against what my religion told me. Similarly there is the case of pork, which even scientifically they said was harmful due to them not knowing how to cook it properly to kill any harmful microorganisms in it but now they can. Though this may be what they say using science as a basis, I will still not consider consuming it.

I will stick by “pure” (Islamic) religious beliefs even over what may be “proven” by science. I also believe that Islam doesn’t need to be revised. This goes back to my initial point and belief that Allah is all knowing and knows what we may never find out. He already knows what will be beneficial to us and what won’t. However, there is a framework to derive rulings that might not have been addressed at the time of its initial establishment, and many times to derive rulings, scientific knowledge is leveraged.

[IsaidwhatIsaid]

Re: The Balance of Science and Religion

@Captain_Obvious

As a believer/follower of Islam, I believe in the oneness of Allah and in His being free of any deficiency. With that, I believe that His knowledge is absolute/perfect while ours isn’t. He knows many things that we might never know. Having said that, I’m not sure what you mean by dilemmas arising from science and religion,** but the first example that comes to mind is that not too long ago, people would say that red wine is beneficial using science as a basis. Now, being a Muslim, just because it supposedly had some basis in science, this would not push me to consume it as it went against what my religion told me. Similarly there is the case of pork, which even scientifically they said was harmful due to them not knowing how to cook it properly to kill any harmful microorganisms in it but now they can. Though this may be what they say using science as a basis, I will still not consider consuming it.**

I will stick by “pure” (Islamic) religious beliefs even over what may be “proven” by science. I also believe that Islam doesn’t need to be revised. This goes back to my initial point and belief that Allah is all knowing and knows what we may never find out. He already knows what will be beneficial to us and what won’t. However, there is a framework to derive rulings that might not have been addressed at the time of its initial establishment, and many times to derive rulings, scientific knowledge is leveraged.

I am not talking about this. I am talking about science finding out information about the big questions of the world that were originally answered by faith and religion, phenomena that cannot be properly explained right now (how the universe came to be, what happens after we die..etc). The ancient Mesopotamians used to believe whenever some kind of disaster was happening that it was the gods punishing them, but we all know now that is not the case because of science. Obviously there is much work to be done before many of these big questions get answered. The point is, how will people go about keeping faith in whatever their religion is when science is able to give answers for questions like “what happens after we die?” and it contradicts their worldview?

[Hakuna_Matata_1]

Re: The Balance of Science and Religion

hahaha.. you haven’t read Quran, did you??

you know, Francis Bacon said “Little knowledge of science makes man an atheist, but in-depth study of science makes him a believer in God”

He also said “Truth will sooner come out of error than from confusion”.. and FYI science hasn’t proved any Quranic Verse wrong Alhamdulillah..

and as a matter of FACT, more than 80% of the Quran has proven right according to the modern science and the rest 20% or so is ambiguous.. means neither right nor wrong or as in, haven’t yet proven.. but my belief is that when it is 80% already perfect without any fault.. rest of 20% will also be right InshaALLAH..

and ultimately it’s science who is weak to prove somethings that hasn’t been proved yet.. and I am sure that there are several thing science cant ever prove.. like death, why living things die, life after death, soul, departure of soul, why human body weighs a bit lighter right after death, why and how life/universe came into being (big bang theory), is it dark matter that is holding everything in universe, heaven, hell, angels, demons, etc.. whereas Islam told everything clearly to Adam and Eve millions of years ago.. and more clearly in Quran around fourteen hundred years ago.. there are only theories so called some hypothesis/ideas which cant be proven correct by any means so far.. science cant even found a DNA of dinosaur.. which is just 10 to 30 thousands year old.. then how come it’s gonna prove a trillions of trillions old years story right.. and you know there is no single proof of human evolution.. just theories.. infact most scientist rejected all these hypothetical theories.. but ALLAH says in Quran.

“Humne insan ko insan ki hi shakal me paida kiya, aur behtar shakal me paida kiya”.. & Poor science wont ever be able to prove that..

however, you’re hurting others coz of lack of knowledge, so you need to do biological studies/researches to prove these things.. and with the knowledge you have right now, it isnt going to take you anywhere.. you cant prove Islam/Quran is wrong in any way.. nor you can prove there is no God.. there are already millions of scientists who failed to do so.. you can choose to get in that line too.. it will be an interesting thing though.. but eventually you’ll find out that Quran isnt wrong at all.. and above that, stop blamming/tagging/calling any religion or culture as lame/dilemma/absurd/old or so without any prove or knowledge.. and going against Our Quran without reading it is wrong, pointless and lame.. you come with some scientific proves and scientific laws, then we will talk..

Best of luck..

[IsaidwhatIsaid]

Re: The Balance of Science and Religion

@Hakuna_Matata

hahaha.. you haven’t read Quran, did you??

you know, Francis Bacon said “Little knowledge of science makes man an atheist, but in-depth study of science makes him a believer in God”

He also said “Truth will sooner come out of error than from confusion”..** and FYI science hasn’t proved any Quranic Verse wrong Alhamdulillah..**
**
Citation Needed

and as a matter of FACT, more than 80% of the Quran has proven right according to the modern science and the rest 20% or so is ambiguous.. means neither right nor wrong or as in, haven’t yet proven.. but my belief is that when it is 80% already perfect without any fault.. rest of 20% will also be right InshaALLAH..

Citation Needed
**
and ultimately 1. it’s science who is weak to prove somethings that hasn’t been proved yet.. and I am sure that there are several thing science cant ever prove..**2. like death, why living things die, life after death, soul, departure of soul, why human body weighs a bit lighter right after death, why and how life/universe came into being (big bang theory), is it dark matter that is holding everything in universe, heaven, hell, angels, demons, etc.. whereas Islam told everything clearly to Adam and Eve millions of years ago.. and more clearly in Quran around fourteen hundred years ago.. there are only theories so called some hypothesis/ideas which cant be proven correct by any means so far.. 3. science cant even found a DNA of dinosaur.. which is just 10 to 30 thousands year old.. ** then how come it’s gonna prove a trillions of trillions old years story right.. **4.and you know there is no single proof of human evolution.. just theories.. infact most scientist rejected all these hypothetical theories.. but ALLAH says in Quran.

1. The point of science is not to spew bull**** information just to answer each and every question. The point of science is to understand the world around us and collect a body of knowledge based off of repeated experimentation around subjects and observations. There needs to be tangible information for science to work with so the reality of the world can actually be explained. I don’t see why you would want to frame that as a weakness. Of course there will be technological constraints when it comes to answering certain questions. All that does is push people forward when it comes to understanding the world and finding ways to do that.
   **
   **2. I’m pretty sure that has been proven by science. There are many ways one can die and it is because of disease and functions in the body that are necessary for living going wrong, among other causes

2. Remains of dinosaurs aren’t just thousands of years old. They are millions of years old, so of course trying to extra DNA from that will be difficult.
   Although not DNA, scientists were able to uncover this from dinosaurs: Scientists retrieve 80-million-year-old dinosaur protein in ?milestone? paper | Science | AAAS

3. I do not think you know how theories work. You see, theories aren’t just random little guesses into what it going on. For something to be accepted as a theory it needs to be well researched and have a body of evidence for it. It gets substantiated through many many repeated experiments. Your scientific illiteracy is astounding. Also, citation needed for “most scientists” rejecting the theory of evolution.
   **
   “Humne insan ko insan ki hi shakal me paida kiya, aur behtar shakal me paida kiya”.. & Poor science wont ever be able to prove that..

**1. however, you’re hurting others coz of lack of knowledge, so you need to do biological studies/researches to prove these things.. and with the knowledge you have right now, it isnt going to take you anywhere.. you cant prove Islam/Quran is wrong in any way.. 2. nor you can prove there is no God.. **there are already millions of scientists who failed to do so.. you can choose to get in that line too.. it will be an interesting thing though.. but eventually you’ll find out that Quran isnt wrong at all.. and above that, stop **3.blamming/tagging/calling any religion or culture as lame/dilemma/absurd/old or so without any prove or knowledge.. and going against Our Quran without reading it is wrong, pointless and lame.. you come with some scientific proves and scientific laws, then we will talk.. **
1. The bodies of knowledge that come from the different sciences literally come after observations and experiments. Inquires into why certain things are the way they are and how they are that way will take people places because that is literally the point. People are getting together to understand their world better instead of relying on the band-aid solution of “God” for questions about the world.
**2. Not yet anyways. I never even claimed that there is no God.
3. I did not insult religion anywhere. What I did was point out the function that religion has cross-culturally. What you need to do is read some material on scientific theories and laws before you scoff at it because this entire reply has displayed that you do not have a single clue about what you are trying to argue against.

**
It is always funny to see people sit there and try to talk to me like I did not grow up in a Muslim household and must one of those ignorant goray atheists lmfao

Replies in this

[Pakistani_Prince]

Re: The Balance of Science and Religion

@Hakuna_Matata

hahaha.. you haven’t read Quran, did you??

you know, Francis Bacon said “Little knowledge of science makes man an atheist, but in-depth study of science makes him a believer in God”

He also said “Truth will sooner come out of error than from confusion”.. and FYI science hasn’t proved any Quranic Verse wrong Alhamdulillah..

and as a matter of FACT, more than 80% of the Quran has proven right according to the modern science and the rest 20% or so is ambiguous.. means neither right nor wrong or as in, haven’t yet proven.. but my belief is that when it is 80% already perfect without any fault.. rest of 20% will also be right InshaALLAH..

and ultimately it’s science who is weak to prove somethings that hasn’t been proved yet.. and I am sure that there are several thing science cant ever prove.. like death, why living things die, life after death, soul, departure of soul, why human body weighs a bit lighter right after death, why and how life/universe came into being (big bang theory), is it dark matter that is holding everything in universe, heaven, hell, angels, demons, etc.. whereas Islam told everything clearly to Adam and Eve millions of years ago.. and more clearly in Quran around fourteen hundred years ago.. there are only theories so called some hypothesis/ideas which cant be proven correct by any means so far.. science cant even found a DNA of dinosaur.. which is just 10 to 30 thousands year old.. then how come it’s gonna prove a trillions of trillions old years story right.. and you know there is no single proof of human evolution.. just theories.. infact most scientist rejected all these hypothetical theories.. but ALLAH says in Quran.

“Humne insan ko insan ki hi shakal me paida kiya, aur behtar shakal me paida kiya”.. & Poor science wont ever be able to prove that..

however, you’re hurting others coz of lack of knowledge, so you need to do biological studies/researches to prove these things.. and with the knowledge you have right now, it isnt going to take you anywhere.. you cant prove Islam/Quran is wrong in any way.. nor you can prove there is no God.. there are already millions of scientists who failed to do so.. you can choose to get in that line too.. it will be an interesting thing though.. but eventually you’ll find out that Quran isnt wrong at all.. and above that, stop blamming/tagging/calling any religion or culture as lame/dilemma/absurd/old or so without any prove or knowledge.. and going against Our Quran without reading it is wrong, pointless and lame.. you come with some scientific proves and scientific laws, then we will talk..

Best of luck..

Excellent, i was about to say all this…
All atheists and seculars should read this..

[Captain_Obvious]

Re: The Balance of Science and Religion

@IsaidwhatIsaid

I am not talking about this. I am talking about science finding out information about the big questions of the world that were originally answered by faith and religion, phenomena that cannot be properly explained right now (how the universe came to be, what happens after we die..etc). The ancient Mesopotamians used to believe whenever some kind of disaster was happening that it was the gods punishing them, but we all know now that is not the case because of science. Obviously there is much work to be done before many of these big questions get answered. The point is, how will people go about keeping faith in whatever their religion is when science is able to give answers for questions like “what happens after we die?” and it contradicts their worldview?

I really don’t see anything science saying about what happens after we die changing any of my beliefs of what has been said according to Islam.

[IsaidwhatIsaid]

Re: The Balance of Science and Religion

@Captain_Obvious

I really don’t see anything science saying about what happens after we die changing any of my beliefs of what has been said according to Islam.

Interesting.

[IsaidwhatIsaid]

Re: The Balance of Science and Religion

@Pakistani_Prince

Excellent, i was about to say all this…
All atheists and seculars should read this..

As a certified “secular” I read it and it did not convince me at all.

[aqua70]

Re: The Balance of Science and Religion

Science and religion are very different things, only the ignorant pen them against each other. Religion is a spiritual journey, it is there to better a society through rules such as not lying, hurting others, not stealing etc. It is also a way of navigating through life when things get rough, through prayer or meditation. Note, I am not including extremists here.

Science is there to understand how things work and how they came to be. Yes religion has its own take on our existence but evolutionary biology is just ONE aspect of this field. The word science encompasses vast fields from embryology to geology which have no relation with religion or its principals. Also IsaidwhatIsaid, you are lumping together all religions as one which in itself is ignorant. Oversimplifying is hardly scientific and the world is not so black and white that people shun one and only accept the other, at least the ones that understand the difference between the two know better.

[IsaidwhatIsaid]

Re: The Balance of Science and Religion

@aqua70

1.Science and religion are very different things, only the ignorant pen them against each other. Religion is a spiritual journey, it is there to better a society through rules such as not lying, hurting others, not stealing etc. It is also a way of navigating through life when things get rough, through prayer or meditation. Note, I am not including extremists here.

Science is there to understand how things work and how they came to be. Yes religion has its own take on our existence but 2.evolutionary biology is just ONE aspect of this field. The word science encompasses vast fields from embryology to geology which have no relation with religion or its principals. Also IsaidwhatIsaid,** 3. you are lumping together all religions as one which in itself is ignorant.** 3.Oversimplifying is hardly scientific and the world is not so black and white that people shun one and only accept the other, at least the ones that understand the difference between the two know better.

1. Yes, they are. They have two different functions in society but sometimes religious beliefs and science contradict each other which creates issues.
2. No sh*t.
3. No, I am not. I am not saying that the general philosophies and beliefs of all religions are going to be the exact same. But, cross-culturally religion has had a general function in society and it has been to explain phenomena that humans could not explain themselves at the time and to provide a moral compass.
   From the OP: “Religion itself came about to explain natural phenomena that could not be explained centuries ago and to create a moral code for people to follow.”
4. Whomst is telling you to shun one or the other? The point of the discussion is how people are going to balance their faith and new scientific knowledge that might contradict what they believe in. It is not just evolutionary biology that might come out with new information that will contradict people’s faith. Galileo’s take on heliocentrism created a lot of controversy among the Catholic church at the time because they claimed it was contrary to scripture and he ended up in a lot of trouble.

[aqua70]

Re: The Balance of Science and Religion

@IsaidwhatIsaid

1. Yes, they are. They have two different functions in society but sometimes religious beliefs and science contradict each other which creates issues.
2. No sh*t.
3. No, I am not. I am not saying that the general philosophies and beliefs of all religions are going to be the exact same. But, cross-culturally religion has had a general function in society and it has been to explain phenomena that humans could not explain themselves at the time and to provide a moral compass.
   From the OP: “Religion itself came about to explain natural phenomena that could not be explained centuries ago and to create a moral code for people to follow.”
4. Whomst is telling you to shun one or the other? The point of the discussion is how people are going to balance their faith and new scientific knowledge that might contradict what they believe in. It is not just evolutionary biology that might come out with new information that will contradict people’s faith. Galileo’s take on heliocentrism created a lot of controversy among the Catholic church at the time because they claimed it was contrary to scripture and he ended up in a lot of trouble.

Umm like they did before? You basically answered your own question. Galileo got in trouble for stating earth is not the center of the universe which contradicted the scripture of that time but did Catholicism disappear? No, centuries later it is still here, they adapted.

[IsaidwhatIsaid]

Re: The Balance of Science and Religion

@aqua70

Umm like they did before? You basically answered your own question. Galileo got in trouble for stating earth is not the center of the universe which contradicted the scripture of that time but did Catholicism disappear? No, centuries later it is still here,** they adapted.**

Now that is the ideal solution isn’t it? Try explaining this concept to some of members here who posted in this thread and every ignorant individual who prioritizes their unfounded religious beliefs over what is being proven with science. Especially with religions (and I am not singling out Islam) that apparently do not need to be revised. This scenario not being addressed has many negative consequences, especially in theocratic countries.

[Hakuna_Matata_1]

Re: The Balance of Science and Religion

@IsaidwhatIsaid

Replies in this

lol, I asked YOU to prove that Quran is wrong in anyway and yet you are laughing your ----ing — off??

and to you first proof/citation.. you seems pointless and illogical here.. bcoz it’s you who said “stick by “pure” religious beliefs no matter what even if the beliefs contradict what is being proven with science?”

so I am asking you to please provide the evidence where religion “ISLAM” contradicts with science..

and to you second query.. here are the answers.. from the root of science..

---

1. so in Surat-ul-Yaseen, verses # 38 & 40, where ALLAH says, “Sun is running it’s course for a period determined to a place determined”..

and hence proved by scientists that sun is moving to a particular direction at a speed of 12 miles per second which is called solar apex.. and in the constellation of Hercules, it is also known as “Alpha Lira”.. that sun is moving to particular spot and will exist for a particular time period..

---

2. so in Surat-ul-Ambiya, verse # 33.. ALLAH says, “The sun and moon beside revolving it also rortates about its axis”..

and new scientific techniques proved that the sun takes approx 25 days to complete one rotation.. also Nicolaus Copernicus propounded the Helio Centric Theory of the planetary motion.. He said it is the sun which is the centre of the solar system..and all the planet as well as the earth is revolving around the sun.. and later on a german scientist, in 1609, Johannes Kepler wrote in his book “Astronomia Nova”.. That not only do the planets and the earth revolve around the sun, but they also rotate around their axis..

---

3. so in Surat-ul-Ambiya, verse # 30, ALLAH says, “Did not those who disbelieve see that the heavens and the earth were joined together as one united small piece and then split”..

and in 1973, scientist got award for claiming universe was found initially by Primary Nebula which was later named as “Big Bang Theory”..

---

4. so in Surat-ul-Naziaat, verse # 30, where ALLAH says, “Earth is egg shaped” as there is a word “daahahaa” which means Egg-shaped..

So, in 1577 Sir Francis Drake proved that the earth is spherical.. and todays scientists proves that earth is not round, its geo spherical in shape, it is flatten from the poles and bulging from the centre..

---

5. So in Surat-ul-Fussilat, verse # 11, ALLAH says, “When He directed Himself to the heaven while it was Smoke”..

and according to modern science, the initial celestial matter of the universe was in the form of Smoke not gases..

---

this all was written more than fourteen hundred years ago.. do you ever think how someone can state those FACTS without any equipments??

I can go on and on with the Quran to prove it all correct with my so-called illiterate and illogical scientific knowledge.. but this isnt the point.. You should read Quran’s translation for once..

[aqua70]

Re: The Balance of Science and Religion

@IsaidwhatIsaid

Now that is the ideal solution isn’t it? Try explaining this concept to some of members here who posted in this thread and every ignorant individual who prioritizes their unfounded religious beliefs over what is being proven with science. Especially with religions (and I am not singling out Islam) that apparently do not need to be revised. This scenario not being addressed has many negative consequences, especially in theocratic countries.

What “unfounded religious beliefs that need to be revised” you are referring to, also what negative consequences is it causing in theocratic countries? You will have to be more specific here.

[IsaidwhatIsaid]

Re: The Balance of Science and Religion

@Hakuna_Matata

lol, I asked YOU to prove that Quran is wrong in anyway and yet you are laughing your ----ing — off??

and to you first proof/citation.. you seems pointless and illogical here.. bcoz it’s you who said “stick by “pure” religious beliefs no matter what even if the beliefs contradict what is being proven with science?”
**
so I am asking you to please provide the evidence where religion “ISLAM” contradicts with science..**

and to you second query.. here are the answers.. from the root of science..

---

1. so in Surat-ul-Yaseen, verses # 38 & 40, where ALLAH says, “Sun is running it’s course for a period determined to a place determined”..

and hence proved by scientists that sun is moving to a particular direction at a speed of 12 miles per second which is called solar apex.. and in the constellation of Hercules, it is also known as “Alpha Lira”.. that sun is moving to particular spot and will exist for a particular time period..

---

2. so in Surat-ul-Ambiya, verse # 33.. ALLAH says, “The sun and moon beside revolving it also rortates about its axis”..

and new scientific techniques proved that the sun takes approx 25 days to complete one rotation.. also Nicolaus Copernicus propounded the Helio Centric Theory of the planetary motion.. He said it is the sun which is the centre of the solar system..and all the planet as well as the earth is revolving around the sun.. and later on a german scientist, in 1609, Johannes Kepler wrote in his book “Astronomia Nova”.. That not only do the planets and the earth revolve around the sun, but they also rotate around their axis..

---

3. so in Surat-ul-Ambiya, verse # 30, ALLAH says, “Did not those who disbelieve see that the heavens and the earth were joined together as one united small piece and then split”..

and in 1973, scientist got award for claiming universe was found initially by Primary Nebula which was later named as “Big Bang Theory”..

---

4. so in Surat-ul-Naziaat, verse # 30, where ALLAH says, “Earth is egg shaped” as there is a word “daahahaa” which means Egg-shaped..

So, in 1577 Sir Francis Drake proved that the earth is spherical.. and todays scientists proves that earth is not round, its geo spherical in shape, it is flatten from the poles and bulging from the centre..

---

5. So in Surat-ul-Fussilat, verse # 11, ALLAH says, “When He directed Himself to the heaven while it was Smoke”..

and according to modern science, the initial celestial matter of the universe was in the form of Smoke not gases..

---

1. this all was written more than fourteen hundred years ago.. do you ever think how someone can state those FACTS without any equipments??

I can go on and on with the Quran to prove it all correct with my so-called illiterate and illogical scientific knowledge.. but this isnt the point.. You should read Quran’s translation for once..

1.Islam and Science: Errors in the Qur’an and Arab Education
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Qur’anic_scientific_errors
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Scientific_Errors_in_the_Quran

Happy reading. The third link does go deeply into analyzing verses, which could border on nitpicking and taking things out of context. However, the beginning of the article does make an important argument as to why it is so nitpicky it what it critiques.

2. Buddy, you do realize that before Islam was founded there were so many civilizations that had bodies of astronomical knowledge? Do the Greeks ring a bell? Ancient Egyptians? Mesopotamians? Civilizations in North America like the Maya also had profound bodies of astronomical knowledge without fancy equipment.