Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Sign in to follow this  
omaryacine

Some Scientific Truths Of Koran

Recommended Posts

twoswordali, Logic is not science. You can look up the detailed definition of Science on Wikipedia. Science is based on logic, and logic is greater than science.

 

What?!???!!!!? You say logic is not science yet you say science is based on logic. So let me get this straight science is predicated on logic, but logic, is no way at all at science??Are you serious this makes no sense what so ever

 

 

The physical world means everything that can be measured, observed, and tested. That means the planets, the galaxies, even my reflection in the mirror. The physical is not limited to Earth, or the Solar System, or the Milky Way Galaxy. It includes the entire universe (or universes, according to some theories).

i agree

 

 

As for the question of God being part of His creation (astaghfurallah!) you can take this up on one of the other forums. Please start a thread over there and we can continue this discussion with other Muslim brothers and sisters. You can also ask a scholar question

 

brother please!! save the astaghfurAllahs for something else, if Allah is not part of this creation then how do we come to know God??? Its through HIS CREATION and your saying that the Creator who of which created all of this and all of this came from Him but in no way at all is God part of this creation, The Quran disagrees with you big time!!

 

Most of the points packham is making are valid points bro twoswordali. Maybe the issue is that you do not speak the English language well. In this case, can you please tell us which languages you speak better? Jazak Allah Khair.

 

Wa Alaikum Salam

 

 

Valid points because your both extreem scientist you guys have no balance so of course your going to see eye to eye, I and many more muslim scientist see things differently. Your Muslim but your trying to disprove the Quran, saying that its not scientific, brother theres nothing worng with my english or ARABIC maybe theres something wrong with your arabic you really need to study the Quran before making ignorant comments. The Quran is very sceintific if it advanced science 1300 years ago you would have to be a complete idiot and fool to say that its unscientific. Common sense tells you that if it was unscientific then theres no way in hell it could have advanced science plain and simple.

 

just a small pont, not intended to be nasty - the Nobel Prize (pronounced no-bell) was established by Alfred Nobel, the inventor of dynamite (or was it TNT?). He felt guilty at becoming so rich from an invention that was so often misued as a weapon. The word 'noble' is not related.

 

 

Donot delude yourself into thinking that your the only one that knows what the nobel prize is or how its pronounced!! If you read what i had written instead of trying to find fault you would clearly see that i made a clear distinction between the word nobel and the nobel prize. Simply what i was saying was that Muhammad name and character is held as the most nobel of all timesand he never recieved any award such as a nobel prize, Now if such a reward was to be given for the advancement of science and religion of God then clearly he would recieve such an award

 

No-one (except certain followers of certain religions) claim to have all the answers - scientists certainly don't. They investigate theories using the Scientific Method. As I keep saying, if the Scientific Method could prove that a god (or anything supernatural at all) exists, it would do so. But it can't. Further (and this is where Cefarix and I part company) if there is no observable effect of gods or other supernatual agents, then living your life as though they existed is pointless even if they did exist.

 

No religious people donot claim to have all the answers how can we when we claim to have all the answers when we alot of or worship of God is on faith!! Not blind faith however!! There is a science to faith as well. Your the type of scientist who would not be satisfied until you've seen God face to...... and this is where you fail for alot of theories are on faith, that this is it ,without any real concreate evidence, one only has to look at what certain scientist said about the earth the solar system a few years ago, and now their changing those words to somthing else. If you claim that theres no God then you are a scientist who is an extreemist who believes he has all the answers, Why? because youve arrived at a opinion that God doesnot exist without even studing God.

 

Acually I don't know of any scientists who believe in UFOs or aliens (in the sense of extra-terrestrial beings who visit the earth), and there's certainly no scientific evidence for them. There does seem to be a good chance that other earth-like planets exist in the universe, and scientists are currently looking for them. And if there are earth-like planets there might also be life. But no scientist claims this as a fact or anything like a fact.edit - typos

 

my point is that they BELIEVE that it exist they Believe in the strong possibility that they exist, without major concrete facts but they will deny that a God exist or reject anybelief in God

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds
Now if such a reward was to be given for the advancement of science and religion of God then clearly he would recieve such an award

 

There is no Nobel Prize for religion, but I agree that Mohammed might possibly have been given one of the science prizes for helping create the conditions in which science could - and did - flourish.

 

There is a science to faith as well. Your the type of scientist who would not be satisfied until you've seen God face to...... and this is where you fail for alot of theories are on faith, that this is it ,without any real concreate evidence, one only has to look at what certain scientist said about the earth the solar system a few years ago, and now their changing those words to somthing else.

 

Yes, theories change. That's what science is about - making a theory and testing it. New evidence or new ideas about the current evidence can change the currently accepted theory.

 

If you claim that theres no God then you are a scientist who is an extreemist who believes he has all the answers, Why? because youve arrived at a opinion that God doesnot exist without even studing God.

 

I specifically said that scientists don't claim to have all the answers. And that science can only study things it can observe, measure, test, etc. If there is a way of studying gods that is scientific, then science would do it. But there isn't. A scientist's personal beliefs have nothing to do with the way the scientist uses the Scientific Method, if the scientist is honest (and most are).

 

 

my point is that they BELIEVE that it exist they Believe in the strong possibility that they exist, without major concrete facts but they will deny that a God exist or reject anybelief in God

 

No. (And if you are talking about UFOs and aliens visiting the earth, I've never heard a scientist say they believe there's a strong possibility of that.) There's a hypothesis that other earth-like planets exist. Because of what we know about the formation of the solar system, it seems a reasonable hypothesis, worth spending time and money on investigating. Scientists are testing that hypothesis by looking for other earth-like planets.

 

There's also a hypothesis that gods exist. If scientists could devise an experiment or a method of investigation to test that hypothesis they would do so. But they can't. As I keep saying, if you think you can, do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I specifically said that scientists don't claim to have all the answers. And that science can only study things it can observe, measure, test, etc. If there is a way of studying gods that is scientific, then science would do it. But there isn't. A scientist's personal beliefs have nothing to do with the way the scientist uses the Scientific Method, if the scientist is honest (and most are).

 

 

Balanced religious people dont claim to have all the answers either, science is a major part of a Muslims life there is no seperation with science and Islam they are together. Now you keep saying gods, No its God and there is a way of studing God as a scientist we study what God created this is how we come to know God. The scientific method does not mean you have to actually see God, we did not see an atom before we decided on the structure of an atom, Dalton's conception of atoms was considered inadequate towards the end of the 19th century yet he never saw an atom But during his time people respected his belief on te structure of the atom.

 

Yes a scientist personal beliefs has everything to do with the way we approach science, if we believe that there is no God then everthing that we research and find we will credit ourselves instead of the one who created the material for us to study in the first place. Its like a 10 year old who in a world with other ten year olds and all the adults have died off, now the ten year old finds a car its not running so he finds some liquid to put in the cars tank after numerous cars and liquids he finially finds some gas and then starts the car. After all that searching he claims himself the wisest for finding the gas and so does the other 10 year olds but he never attributes or aknowledges credit to those who built the car in the first place.

 

No. (And if you are talking about UFOs and aliens visiting the earth, I've never heard a scientist say they believe there's a strong possibility of that.) There's a hypothesis that other earth-like planets exist. Because of what we know about the formation of the solar system, it seems a reasonable hypothesis, worth spending time and money on investigating. Scientists are testing that hypothesis by looking for other earth-like planets.

 

read this

 

WASHINGTON, July 20 (UPI) -- There has been resurgent interest among U.S. researchers to find alien life forms, scientists say.

 

The Washington Post (NYSE:WPO) reported Sunday that there has been an explosion of interest in astrobiology, the search for extreme forms of life on Earth and for possibly similar life on other planets.

 

Biogeologist Lisa Pratt of Indiana University is among scientists who study so-called "extremophiles," or microbes found in very harsh Earth environments.

 

Pratt and her colleagues explored the depths of South African gold mines, where they found bacteria sustained only by the radioactive decay of nearby rocks.

 

"Until several years ago, absolutely nobody thought this kind of life was possible -- it hadn't even made it into science fiction," she said. "Now it's quite possible to imagine a microbe like that living deep beneath the surface of Mars."Edward Weiler, one of the founders of NASA's astrobiology program, said there are likely other life forms out there.

 

"We now know the number of stars in the universe is something like 1 followed by 23 zeros," he said. "Given that number, how arrogant to think ours is the only sun with a planet that supports life, and that it's in the only solar system with intelligent life."

 

 

Now looking at this how arrogant is it to claim that there is no God andt that no intelligent being created all of this

 

 

There's also a hypothesis that gods exist. If scientists could devise an experiment or a method of investigation to test that hypothesis they would do so. But they can't. As I keep saying, if you think you can, do it.

 

Not all scientist are of the same mind set as you im a student of science and i believe in God, you keep talking as if all scientist agree with what your saying. Now the experiment or the method of investigation is in the studing of the earth, and all thats in it, its also in the study of your heart and what you believe based on your findings in a planet that You had absolutly nothing to do with creating it.

 

Who or what created this universe that makes us excell in intellect just by studing it, who or what put this into the creation for us to learn from gain wisdom and knowledge, whatever created this universe must have been extreemly intelligent to put all of this into the creation. This is why as balanced scientist we call it a universe UNI(ONE) VERSE symbolising that there must be more verses out there because what ever created this one verse (uni verse) must be soooooooooooo inteligent that it has to have created more verses and we just get to study this one. That which i call whatever or who is called GOD in arabic its Allah (The God) or One God. One God one universe One God many verses

Edited by twoswordali

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The scientific method does not mean you have to actually see God, we did not see an atom before we decided on the structure of an atom, Dalton's conception of atoms was considered inadequate towards the end of the 19th century yet he never saw an atom But during his time people respected his belief on te structure of the atom.

 

Yes, because he conducted repeatable experiments and formed hypotheses which were shown to fit the facts. He used the Scientific Method. As I seem to repeat in every post, if you think that the Scientific Method can show the existence of a god, then do it. The fact that the Scientific method has so far been unable to show the existence of a god isn't because of any bias on the part of scientists, it's because it cannot on the evidence currently available.

 

Yes a scientist personal beliefs has everything to do with the way we approach science, if we believe that there is no God then everthing that we research and find we will credit ourselves instead of the one who created the material for us to study in the first place. Its like a 10 year old who in a world with other ten year olds and all the adults have died off, now the ten year old finds a car its not running so he finds some liquid to put in the cars tank after numerous cars and liquids he finially finds some gas and then starts the car. After all that searching he claims himself the wisest for finding the gas and so does the other 10 year olds but he never attributes or aknowledges credit to those who built the car in the first place.

 

You might be right, but in that case you are rejecting science.

 

Now looking at this how arrogant is it to claim that there is no God andt that no intelligent being created all of this

 

I don't claim there is no god, I claim that there is no evidence for a god, and unless that evidence is forthcoming I'd be silly to believe in a god. Others take a different approach, I agree.

 

edit, oops, sorry, I didn't read the article you quoted. They are saying that based on their observations of life on earth, they hypothesize that life could exist in "unfriendly" circumstances on other planets. It's an entirely scientific statement. They aren't saying that it's a fact that it exists, they are saying that it's a hypothesis worth researching. The existence of god/s is a hypothesis worth considering too, and it has been, often. But as there's no evidence to study, it doesn't achieve much.

 

Not all scientist are of the same mind set as you im a student of science and i believe in God, you keep talking as if all scientist agree with what your saying. Now the experiment or the method of investigation is in the studing of the earth, and all thats in it, its also in the study of your heart and what you believe based on your findings in a planet that You had absolutly nothing to do with creating it.

 

Why do you keep telling me that I didn't create the earth? Of course I didn't! Nothing I've said implies that I think I did.

 

You're using the word "heart" as a metaphor for something I don't believe exists. Science does in fact study the human brain and consciousness (although we're at a pretty early stage and it might not be possible to use brains to discover everything about brains). Branches of science such as psychology study human behaviour. Of course I agree that science isn't much fun on this (reading Freud on jokes is painful) and I prefer to use the Arts as my tool for learning about being human.

 

Who or what created this universe that makes us excell in intellect just by studing it, who or what put this into the creation for us to learn from gain wisdom and knowledge, whatever created this universe must have been extreemly intelligent to put all of this into the creation.

 

Not at all. It's just a few simple laws of physics, chemistry and biology. I do agree that what happened prior to the Big Bang is a mystrery, and as I've said many times before in this thread, if you want to imagine that a supernatural being caused the Big Bang, fair enough. However there's no evidence for anything supernatural happening in the universe since the Big Bang began - ie, since the universe existed.

 

This is why as balanced scientist we call it a universe UNI(ONE) VERSE symbolising that there must be more verses out there because what ever created this one verse (uni verse) must be soooooooooooo inteligent that it has to have created more verses and we just get to study this one. That which i call whatever or who is called GOD in arabic its Allah (The God) or One God. One God one universe One God many verses

 

No intelligence at all was required to set off the Big Bang (I agree that there could have been intelligence, but it wasn't a requirement), and all the "creation' that has happened since is just the way the laws of nature work.

Edited by packham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, because he conducted repeatable experiments and formed hypotheses which were shown to fit the facts. He used the Scientific Method. As I seem to repeat in every post, if you think that the Scientific Method can show the existence of a god, then do it. The fact that the Scientific method has so far been unable to show the existence of a god isn't because of any bias on the part of scientists, it's because it cannot on the evidence currently available.

 

Studying nature and the universe points to inteligent design all scientist agree upon this.

 

You might be right, but in that case you are rejecting science.

 

No like I said before science and Islam go hand and hand, the example i gave was how scientist approach God

 

I don't claim there is no god, I claim that there is no evidence for a god, and unless that evidence is forthcoming I'd be silly to believe in a god. Others take a different approach, I agree.

 

Theres plenty of evidence in the earth but some reject the evidence and attribute it to something else

 

edit, oops, sorry, I didn't read the article you quoted. They are saying that based on their observations of life on earth, they hypothesize that life could exist in "unfriendly" circumstances on other planets. It's an entirely scientific statement. They aren't saying that it's a fact that it exists, they are saying that it's a hypothesis worth researching. The existence of god/s is a hypothesis worth considering too, and it has been, often. But as there's no evidence to study, it doesn't achieve much.

 

Yes and what religious scientist are saying is based on the in depth complex design of earth and the entire universe and the LAWS that these follow that it points to intelligent design from whom we call God or Allah. It points to an intelligent being

 

You're using the word "heart" as a metaphor for something I don't believe exists. Science does in fact study the human brain and consciousness (although we're at a pretty early stage and it might not be possible to use brains to discover everything about brains). Branches of science such as psychology study human behaviour. Of course I agree that science isn't much fun on this (reading Freud on jokes is painful) and I prefer to use the Arts as my tool for learning about being human.

 

The human being is a structure to be studied deeply, now the arts is good I agree however what would you say about a doctor who brings only a knife to the surgery room and nothing else and no one else, think you have a good chance of surviving??

 

 

 

No intelligence at all was required to set off the Big Bang (I agree that there could have been intelligence, but it wasn't a requirement), and all the "creation' that has happened since is just the way the laws of nature work.

 

Now come on!!! The requirment for the study of science is having some intelligence, To study anything the requirment is that you have to have some intellectual amplitude and to design something and make it takes intelligence.To study math that we as humans put forth as a language takes some intelligence and those who designed the language had intelligence. Now looking at this whole world and universe and the laws that they follow you will drop off your intelligence and say it was just a bang, nothing cause it, we just formed out of nowhere,it was nothing before the bang,nothing caused it it just happened. Look how far your intelligence has slipped we can look at everything in this world and come to conclusions and some times very good educated guesses, but when it come to reconising that this world has laws set in place that was not put here by us and that something with a huge wealth of inteligence had to have put this here for us to study and learn from.

 

We can give credit to people for their discoveries but neglect the fact that they made their discoveries in a place that wasn't designed by them. They've taken full credit for work of something that was already there, now what do we call that when in college and we take anothers work and improve on it or study it and don't give the credit where the credits due????? PLAGIARISM!!!!!!! Now if we give credit to God the higher intellect then we can move on in our studies of His work and what we improve on or find we give credit to God first for putting this in the creation for us to learn from then we can give our report in and recieve an A+ or a nobel prize from men.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What?!???!!!!? You say logic is not science yet you say science is based on logic. So let me get this straight science is predicated on logic, but logic, is no way at all at science??Are you serious this makes no sense what so ever

 

Let me clarify. Whenever I say science, I mean the physical sciences. Physics, chemistry, biology, etc. Here is the definition of logic from Wikipedia:

Logic is the study of the principles of valid inference and demonstration. The word derives from Greek λογική (logike), fem. of λογικός (logikos), "possessed of reason, intellectual, dialectical, argumentative", from λόγος logos, "word, thought, idea, argument, account, reason, or principle".

 

Here is the definition of logic from dictionary.reference(contact admin if its a beneficial link):

1. the science that investigates the principles governing correct or reliable inference.

 

Generally when we say "science", we mean "physical sciences", such as physics, chemistry, biology, and other fields derived from these three basic ones. But there are other "sciences". Logic and mathematics, for example, are called "formal sciences". Fields like psychology, anthropology, history, etc are called "social sciences". So I just want to make it clear that on this thread whenever I say the word "science" by itself, I am talking about the "physical sciences" which study the physical world through the empirical scientific method.

 

brother please!! save the astaghfurAllahs for something else, if Allah is not part of this creation then how do we come to know God??? Its through HIS CREATION and your saying that the Creator who of which created all of this and all of this came from Him but in no way at all is God part of this creation, The Quran disagrees with you big time!!

 

We'll discuss this further on another thread in a different forum as it is off-topic for this thread.

 

Valid points because your both extreem scientist you guys have no balance so of course your going to see eye to eye, I and many more muslim scientist see things differently. Your Muslim but your trying to disprove the Quran, saying that its not scientific, brother theres nothing worng with my english or ARABIC maybe theres something wrong with your arabic you really need to study the Quran before making ignorant comments. The Quran is very sceintific if it advanced science 1300 years ago you would have to be a complete idiot and fool to say that its unscientific. Common sense tells you that if it was unscientific then theres no way in hell it could have advanced science plain and simple.

 

I apologize if I insulted you in any manner. I was merely trying to ascertain whether there was a language barrier in our communication. Thanks for clarifying that you speak English well. I'm not an extremist scientist, in fact, I don't think there is such a thing as an extremist scientist. I am merely refuting your arguments by using the definitions of science, theory, and scientific method, which I got from an encyclopedia and a dictionary. Also, I am not trying to disprove the Qur'an. Saying that the Qur'an does not have scientific statements does not mean I am disproving it. Although I probably do not speak Arabic as well as you, I can understand it well enough to understand the Quran nonetheless, with the help of several translation. If a word is tricky, I usually look up the meaning in several translations in English and Urdu, as well as an Arabic dictionary. I may also consult a tafsir. Brother, this entire time, I have been trying to teach you what the meaning of "scientific" is. Do you understand what "scientific" means? If so, please explain the meaning to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Studying nature and the universe points to inteligent design all scientist agree upon this.

 

No, few scientist agree upon that.

 

I'm not sure what you think the 'intelligent designer' (I'll call him/her/it ID from now on) did. At what point did the ID allow the laws of nature to do the work? For example, the currently accepted theory (and it's accepted by all scientists working in the field) of how bodies in the universe formed is basically by the original 'lumpiness' of the distribution of the random atoms that appeared at the Big Bang. This eventually allowed gravity to create larger and larger 'lumps', which compressed into bodies. (That's probably a very incomplete description but you see where I'm coming from.) Was the ID involved in this process? Or do you disagree that the process happened?

 

Theres plenty of evidence in the earth but some reject the evidence and attribute it to something else

 

If there's scientific evidence it can be scientifically proven or disproven. So far, no scientist has been able to prove it. Science isn't a matter of opinion.

 

Yes and what religious scientist are saying is based on the in depth complex design of earth and the entire universe and the LAWS that these follow that it points to intelligent design from whom we call God or Allah. It points to an intelligent being

 

Some scientists who happen to be also religious might, but no scientist has used science to show that this is the case.

 

The human being is a structure to be studied deeply, now the arts is good I agree however what would you say about a doctor who brings only a knife to the surgery room and nothing else and no one else, think you have a good chance of surviving??

 

I think that's a silly metaphor, with respect. And by 'the arts' I mean the creative arts, not just technical skills.

 

Now come on!!! The requirment for the study of science is having some intelligence, To study anything the requirment is that you have to have some intellectual amplitude and to design something and make it takes intelligence.To study math that we as humans put forth as a language takes some intelligence and those who designed the language had intelligence. Now looking at this whole world and universe and the laws that they follow you will drop off your intelligence and say it was just a bang, nothing cause it, we just formed out of nowhere,it was nothing before the bang,nothing caused it it just happened. Look how far your intelligence has slipped we can look at everything in this world and come to conclusions and some times very good educated guesses, but when it come to reconising that this world has laws set in place that was not put here by us and that something with a huge wealth of inteligence had to have put this here for us to study and learn from.

 

All that was "created" at the Big bang was a vast number of atoms and some "laws" (calling them "laws" is a metaphor, not a statement of fact). Everything that has happened since has happened for reasons that do not require supernatural intervention, and there is no evidence of any supernatural intervention. As I keep saying (and I'm getting tired of repeating it, but you don't seem to get it) perhaps a supernatural being caused the Big Bang.

 

We can give credit to people for their discoveries but neglect the fact that they made their discoveries in a place that wasn't designed by them.

 

No we don't. We give credit to humans for explaining things.

 

They've taken full credit for work of something that was already there, now what do we call that when in college and we take anothers work and improve on it or study it and don't give the credit where the credits due????? PLAGIARISM!!!!!!! Now if we give credit to God the higher intellect then we can move on in our studies of His work and what we improve on or find we give credit to God first for putting this in the creation for us to learn from then we can give our report in and recieve an A+ or a nobel prize from men.

 

I don't think your analogy works. People discover things in (say) Shakespeare all the time, but that doesn't make it plagiarism.

 

You can give credit to any designer you like, but the fact is that science can find no scientifically valid evidence of this designer. Yet again (and I do get tired of repeating myself), if you think there is scientifically valid evidence for a designer, apply the Scientific Method to it. If you can use the Scientific Method to prove that a god exists you will become very, very famous.

Edited by packham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let me clarify. Whenever I say science, I mean the physical sciences. Physics, chemistry, biology, etc. Here is the definition of logic from Wikipedia:

Logic is the study of the principles of valid inference and demonstration. The word derives from Greek λογική (logike), fem. of λογικός (logikos), "possessed of reason, intellectual, dialectical, argumentative", from λόγος logos, "word, thought, idea, argument, account, reason, or principle".

 

Here is the definition of logic from dictionary.reference(contact admin if its a beneficial link):

1. the science that investigates the principles governing correct or reliable inference.

 

Generally when we say "science", we mean "physical sciences", such as physics, chemistry, biology, and other fields derived from these three basic ones. But there are other "sciences". Logic and mathematics, for example, are called "formal sciences". Fields like psychology, anthropology, history, etc are called "social sciences". So I just want to make it clear that on this thread whenever I say the word "science" by itself, I am talking about the "physical sciences" which study the physical world through the empirical scientific method.

 

 

yes ok however the word empirical also means to be guided by practical experience and not theory, so you can very well fall into the trap of the extreem unbalanced scientist and just follow suit in whatever is told to you. The Quran came to break those chains, the quran is science and thats clear, like i said before if it wasn't theres no way that it could have advanced science. Your talking about one aspect of the sphere of science and im talking about the whole sphere

 

We'll discuss this further on another thread in a different forum as it is off-topic for this thread.

 

no problem brother

 

 

I'm not an extremist scientist, in fact, I don't think there is such a thing as an extremist scientist. I am merely refuting your arguments by using the definitions of science, theory, and scientific method, which I got from an encyclopedia and a dictionary. Also, I am not trying to disprove the Qur'an. Saying that the Qur'an does not have scientific statements does not mean I am disproving it.

 

No your not disproving it but your sure trying, saying that the Quran doesnot have scientific statements is a very ignorant apporach to the Quran like i said the Quran covers the whole sphere of science, now if your looking specifically for mathematical formulas only then no you wont see that right away. However again i must stress this, the Quran advanced science not just one particular slice of the science pie but the whole pie. Now for this information thats clear and the whole world accepts this for a Muslim to come and say that the Quran is not scientific, what else are you trying to do,your degrading your Holy book, that the rest of the world acknowledges and owes its thanks for the help it provided in advancing the world scientificly. And here you are the Muslim trying to find argument to say that the Quran is unscientific by using information that was possible because of the Quran.

 

 

I have been trying to teach you what the meaning of "scientific" is. Do you understand what "scientific" means? If so, please explain the meaning to me.

 

Im very comfortable with the meaning of scientific, and i believe that the Quran is scientific.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

twoswordali, can you please explain to me what "scientific" means? I have explained what I think it means. I would like to hear your definition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK MAYBE I WROTE IT TO SMALL SO I WILL SAY IT AGAIAN IN LOUD LETTERS, IM VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THE MEANING OF SCIENTIFIC, AND I BELIEVE THAT THE QURAN IS VERY SCIENTIFIC. Does this sink in brother or is it something else that you are asking, if so here is another answer, When I think of scientific i think of what lead us out of the dark ages what advanced science to high degrees,what advanced people in the social and formal and all aspects os science, and on that thinking ive come to believe that the Quran represents what scientific is.You as a muslim disagrees which to me makes no sense if you dont believe that the Quran is scientific in all spheres of science then what do you read the Quran for??? The Quran advances the life of a scientist and those who are in the sphere of science, but if you dont think that it is scientific then what are you a muslim scientist reading it for????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

twoswordali, the problem is that the dictionary and the encyclopedia does not agree by your definition of "scientific". Your definition of "scientific" is incorrect.

 

What led us out of the dark ages and what advanced science to high degrees, what advanced us in social, formal, and other aspects, was not "scientific", it was Islam and the message of the Quran that did so.

 

I believe that the Quran is the word of God. That's why I read it. I don't need any other reason to read it.

 

I believe that the Quran and Islam advance the life of all human beings, not just scientists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
twoswordali, the problem is that the dictionary and the encyclopedia does not agree by your definition of "scientific". Your definition of "scientific" is incorrect.

 

I dont think so , by definition the Quran is scientific.

 

What led us out of the dark ages and what advanced science to high degrees, what advanced us in social, formal, and other aspects, was not "scientific", it was Islam and the message of the Quran that did so.

 

Ok then take away the Quran take away Islam take away the Prophet Muhammad what do we have?? How advanced are we scientificlyif these never existed?????

 

I believe that the Quran is the word of God. That's why I read it. I don't need any other reason to read it.

 

And I suppose the word of God in no way relates to science huh?? So God is just wasting His time giving you meaningless words huh?? Come off it bro the Quran is very scientific.

 

I believe that the Quran and Islam advance the life of all human beings, not just scientists.

 

So now you say it advances the social sciences I agree so why do you say its not scientific :sl: ? And for the record since were being pedantic scientist are human beings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont think so , by definition the Quran is scientific.

 

No, by definition, the Quran is a guide for the pious. See verse 2:2.

 

And I suppose the word of God in no way relates to science huh?? So God is just wasting His time giving you meaningless words huh?? Come off it bro the Quran is very scientific.

 

So you are going to measure the worth of God's word by seeing if it is scientific or not? God's word relates to everything, and God's word is meaningful not because it is related to anything but because it is from God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, by definition, the Quran is a guide for the pious. See verse 2:2.

 

 

For the pious yes but lets not forget using the same ayat it says "in it is a guidance sure, without doubt,to those who fear Allah" Now here Allah is putting together guidance and faith, how does one arrive at faith?? Through knowledege, it is through knowledge that you arrive at piety. A pious scientist will be guided by Allah and he or she will see that through their study of science they will come to know God increasing or advancing them in knowledge and they will say. Surah 20:114"oh my Lord advance me in knowledge" You Cannot arrive at piety with out some form of knowledge, Muhammad arrived at piety by knowing that his people were doing wrong and staying far away from the practices that they did. His knowledge lead to piety which lead to him advancing foward with knowledge that came from God. And you say that the Quran is not scientific???

 

So you are going to measure the worth of God's word by seeing if it is scientific or not? God's word relates to everything, and God's word is meaningful not because it is related to anything but because it is from God.

 

First off no! Im not going to measure Gods words to prove if its scientific or not I have already told you that i strongly believe that it is scientific you however are guilty of measuring Gods words with the dictionary, encyclopedieas, and wikipedia to justify or try and prove that the word of God (THE QURAN) is not scientific. YOU HAVE DONE THAT NOT ME!! I look at those same resourses and its definitions and say that this is describing the Quran. You are wrong brother Gods word is Meaningful because it does relate, if it did not relate to anything then there will be no advancement of science or any advancement for the human life, The Quran is meaningful because it relates to the human being on all levels of knowledge, if it didn't relate then we wouldn't follow. To say that its just Gods words means what???? Heck Christians, Jews, idol worrshipers, can all claim to have a book with Gods words, but if it cannot relate to the human being then it is useless and not from God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, few scientist agree upon that.

No majority of scientist agree that this earth is from intelligent design

 

I'm not sure what you think the 'intelligent designer' (I'll call him/her/it ID from now on) did.

 

Hey thats a huge step well done Ill push it a little bit further and lets call Him the "Great Omnipotent Designer" can we agree on this its not harmfull is it??

 

At what point did the ID allow the laws of nature to do the work? For example, the currently accepted theory (and it's accepted by all scientists working in the field) of how bodies in the universe formed is basically by the original 'lumpiness' of the distribution of the random atoms that appeared at the Big Bang. This eventually allowed gravity to create larger and larger 'lumps', which compressed into bodies. (That's probably a very incomplete description but you see where I'm coming from.) Was the ID involved in this process? Or do you disagree that the process happened?

 

 

The Quran says that Allah created all of this in 6 days( the 6 can mean days or millions of years) and then established Himself on the throne meaning that he Governs these Laws so I dont believe that this is out of the control of the God(Great Omnipotent Designer) He designed this whole universal engine and Hes running it. What we have is a theory now, thats soon to be changed pretty soon no doubt about that, But as far as the process your describing i can agree with that like i said im a student as well and im willing to learn as much as i can about this earth and universe, and that means making mistakes from time to time but im trying to understand the Great Omnipotent Designer.

 

 

Science isn't a matter of opinion.

 

 

Alot of it is we just call it "THEORIES"

 

 

All that was "created" at the Big bang was a vast number of atoms and some "laws" (calling them "laws" is a metaphor, not a statement of fact). Everything that has happened since has happened for reasons that do not require supernatural intervention, and there is no evidence of any supernatural intervention.

 

 

As smart as we all are when it comes to the studing of the universe we can't come up with no other words but the big bang, you dont know what happened if we knewwhat happened the we should be able to restructure the whole process ??no?? Something beyond our control created that and the Quran agrees with you on the big bang Allah says when ever He wants to create something He says be and it is do we know how that happens no we dont, Big Bang and heres the universe.

 

No we don't. We give credit to humans for explaining things.

 

did you read what i said????

 

I don't think your analogy works. People discover things in (say) Shakespeare all the time, but that doesn't make it plagiarism.

 

Please how do you know that they found it in shakespere?? they gave credit where credits due, but when we study the earth, a place that we found here, we get goodies out of the earth but dont give credit to the Great Omnipotent Designer we act as if we found this all on our own.

 

You can give credit to any designer you like, but the fact is that science can find no scientifically valid evidence of this designer. Yet again (and I do get tired of repeating myself), if you think there is scientifically valid evidence for a designer, apply the Scientific Method to it. If you can use the Scientific Method to prove that a god exists you will become very, very famous.

 

 

Dont be so stupid just look at our bodies how can you look at our bodies and not see that it is structured well. That we are of a design, from our head down to our feet and our insides as well, If you found a watch that was made 10,000 years ago in egypt what would you say??? Youll try and find out who made it and what tools they used but you will come to the reality that an intelligent person made it, why not look at the earth like that???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No majority of scientist agree that this earth is from intelligent design

 

Sorry, that's just simply wrong.

 

The Quran says that Allah created all of this in 6 days( the 6 can mean days or millions of years) and then established Himself on the throne meaning that he Governs these Laws so I dont believe that this is out of the control of the God(Great Omnipotent Designer) He designed this whole universal engine and Hes running it. What we have is a theory now, thats soon to be changed pretty soon no doubt about that, But as far as the process your describing i can agree with that like i said im a student as well and im willing to learn as much as i can about this earth and universe, and that means making mistakes from time to time but im trying to understand the Great Omnipotent Designer.

 

I asked if you thought that the bodies in the universe were formed in the way that msot scientists in the relevant field consider the best current explanation - that the 'lumpiness' of distribution of the original random atoms meant that gravity tended to form the 'lumps' into larger and larger objects. if you do go along with current scientific thought on this, what role do you think a god played in it? That is, if by 'creation' you mean setting the conditions whereby nature would take its course, or do you think that a god needed to play an active part in it?

 

Alot of it is we just call it "THEORIES"

 

Yep, everything is "just" a theory. but a successful theory is one which accounts for the facts as they are currently known. And we cannot know any more than is currently known.

 

As smart as we all are when it comes to the studing of the universe we can't come up with no other words but the big bang, you dont know what happened if we knewwhat happened the we should be able to restructure the whole process ??no?? Something beyond our control created that and the Quran agrees with you on the big bang Allah says when ever He wants to create something He says be and it is do we know how that happens no we dont, Big Bang and heres the universe.

 

We might not yet be able to reconstruct the whole process up to the Big Bang, but there's no reason why we won't be able to eventually, and we can reconstruct a lot of it right now. I agree that we probably can never know what happened before the Big Bang, as the universe didn't exist then.

 

 

Please how do you know that they found it in shakespere??

 

 

Umm, they are writing books about things they find in Shakespeare - artistic things, not scientific things. I was using it as an analogy to show that it isn't 'plagiarisn' to make discoveries in something you didn't make.

 

they gave credit where credits due, but when we study the earth, a place that we found here, we get goodies out of the earth but dont give credit to the Great Omnipotent Designer we act as if we found this all on our own.

 

You can give all the credit you like to whatever you like, but the point of this discussion is that no-one has been able to provide any scientific evidence for the existence of a god or any other supernatural activity. Thus, in scientific terms, the hypothesis "There is a god" is not proven.

 

Dont be so stupid just look at our bodies how can you look at our bodies and not see that it is structured well. That we are of a design, from our head down to our feet and our insides as well, If you found a watch that was made 10,000 years ago in egypt what would you say??? Youll try and find out who made it and what tools they used but you will come to the reality that an intelligent person made it, why not look at the earth like that???

 

Why? There are perfectly good explanations of why things are as they are that don't require a supernatural being. Humans aren't structured perfectly, anyway. We can die if our appendix (an entirely useless organ) becomes infected, we wear out after a ridiculously short life, many of us are born witrh painful and disabling defects, our eyes are poor compared to some other species, as are all our senses. We are by no mean perfect, but enough of us manage to live long enough to reproduce, which is all that evolution requires.

Edited by packham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For the pious yes but lets not forget using the same ayat it says "in it is a guidance sure, without doubt,to those who fear Allah" Now here Allah is putting together guidance and faith, how does one arrive at faith?? Through knowledege, it is through knowledge that you arrive at piety. A pious scientist will be guided by Allah and he or she will see that through their study of science they will come to know God increasing or advancing them in knowledge and they will say. Surah 20:114"oh my Lord advance me in knowledge" You Cannot arrive at piety with out some form of knowledge, Muhammad arrived at piety by knowing that his people were doing wrong and staying far away from the practices that they did. His knowledge lead to piety which lead to him advancing foward with knowledge that came from God. And you say that the Quran is not scientific???

 

"Lil Muttaqeen" can also be translated as "for the pious". You seem to be working science into the verse when the verse does not mention science at all. Verse 20:114 also does not mention science it mentions knowledge. Knowledge and science are not the same thing. Science is only one method of arriving at the knowledge of the physical world. There are many other methods for getting the knowledge of other things, and the Quran talks about all kinds of knowledge, not just scientific knowledge. And yes, I am saying the Quran is not scientific. By saying the Quran is scientific, you are limiting the Quran to only science. But the Quran talks about everything and all kinds of knowledge, not just science.

 

First off no! Im not going to measure Gods words to prove if its scientific or not I have already told you that i strongly believe that it is scientific you however are guilty of measuring Gods words with the dictionary, encyclopedieas, and wikipedia to justify or try and prove that the word of God (THE QURAN) is not scientific. YOU HAVE DONE THAT NOT ME!! I look at those same resourses and its definitions and say that this is describing the Quran. You are wrong brother Gods word is Meaningful because it does relate, if it did not relate to anything then there will be no advancement of science or any advancement for the human life, The Quran is meaningful because it relates to the human being on all levels of knowledge, if it didn't relate then we wouldn't follow. To say that its just Gods words means what???? Heck Christians, Jews, idol worrshipers, can all claim to have a book with Gods words, but if it cannot relate to the human being then it is useless and not from God.

 

First of all, I never measured the Quran against encyclopedias or the dictionary. I only measured the word "scientific" against encyclopedias and dictionary. Bro, please stop trying to twist my words. And I have already said that God's word relates to everything, not just science, but everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I asked if you thought that the bodies in the universe were formed in the way that msot scientists in the relevant field consider the best current explanation - that the 'lumpiness' of distribution of the original random atoms meant that gravity tended to form the 'lumps' into larger and larger objects. if you do go along with current scientific thought on this, what role do you think a god played in it?

 

The role that God played is that He made the universe in the first place, God controls the whole part of the creation from the begining till it's end He is activly in control, we however are learning from Gods works so what scientist have put forward i can accept for now because we are trying to understand how the Great Omnipotent Designer made this living universe, so yes i can accept that and I also accept the Fact that God made This.

 

 

 

Umm, they are writing books about things they find in Shakespeare - artistic things, not scientific things. I was using it as an analogy to show that it isn't 'plagiarisn' to make discoveries in something you didn't make.

 

Yes i understood your analogy very well, and what i was saying was that how do we know that they found it in shakespere?? This was a rhetorical question, and right after what i was saying was that the people who found what ever in shakespheare the gave credit where credit was due they said that they Got this from studing shakspeare. Now what would happen if the studied shakespeare and gave him no credit for what they discovered?? That would be Plagiarism!! The same is when we study the earth and then act like our finds are all ours when were studying a something that was placed here before us.

 

You can give all the credit you like to whatever you like, but the point of this discussion is that no-one has been able to provide any scientific evidence for the existence of a god or any other supernatural activity. Thus, in scientific terms, the hypothesis "There is a god" is not proven.

 

Many of prophets came with the message of one God and many of people denied the God, There is a God has been proven its just that some happen not to believe that there is a God and in their studies would rather give full credit to man and none to the Being who made the school for them to study at. If prophets had problems with you peoples mind set what chance does anyone else have? Science and religion go hand and hand but some would wish to cut off the hand of God and walk around amputated but claim that their normal.

 

Why? There are perfectly good explanations of why things are as they are that don't require a supernatural being. Humans aren't structured perfectly, anyway. We can die if our appendix (an entirely useless organ) becomes infected, we wear out after a ridiculously short life, many of us are born witrh painful and disabling defects, our eyes are poor compared to some other species, as are all our senses. We are by no mean perfect, but enough of us manage to live long enough to reproduce, which is all that evolution requires.

 

You cannot be a scientist this im sure of because all of the scientist that i learn from and study with ALL have great appreciation for the human body, you have made a very stupid ignorant statement. The structure of the human being is so complex that we have been studing it for centuries we have yet to master the brain. Our structure is perfect in so many ways, you cannot be a true scientist a true scientist would not say such a thing

 

"Lil Muttaqeen" can also be translated as "for the pious". You seem to be working science into the verse when the verse does not mention science at all. Verse 20:114 also does not mention science it mentions knowledge. Knowledge and science are not the same thing. Science is only one method of arriving at the knowledge of the physical world. There are many other methods for getting the knowledge of other things, and the Quran talks about all kinds of knowledge, not just scientific knowledge.

 

 

You said that you study arabic right?? Well illm is knowledge and also it means science ilm has vast meanings. Science is the systematic study and knowledge of the natural or physical phenomena, and phenomena is anything appearing or observed or a remarkable person or thing Well the Quran gives us the knowledge of how approach science and come to the conclusion of worshipping God(a remarkable thing)

 

And yes, I am saying the Quran is not scientific. By saying the Quran is scientific, you are limiting the Quran to only science. But the Quran talks about everything and all kinds of knowledge, not just science.

 

The word science covers everything dealing with knowledge, social science natural science...........ect.ect. To study the Quran is a science in its self and Allah lays out the science of how to approach the Quran and you a muslim says that its not scientific, how do you approach the Quran?? Dont you use the science that Allah gives you on how to approach the Book??

 

 

First of all, I never measured the Quran against encyclopedias or the dictionary. I only measured the word "scientific" against encyclopedias and dictionary. Bro, please stop trying to twist my words. And I have already said that God's word relates to everything, not just science, but everything.

 

What you just said that the Quran is not scientific!!!! And according to your understanding of the encyclopedias and dictionary and wikepedia the Quran is not scientific THIS IS MEASURING THE QURAN AGAINST OTHER SOURSES. BUT YOU HAVE FAILED TO SHOW THAT IT IS NOT SCIENTIFIC IT IS!!! Now look at your last statement if you believe that Gods word relates to everything then why be hypocritical against your own statement and say that the Quran is not scientific? If the Quran relates to everything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The role that God played is that He made the universe in the first place, God controls the whole part of the creation from the begining till it's end He is activly in control, we however are learning from Gods works so what scientist have put forward i can accept for now because we are trying to understand how the Great Omnipotent Designer made this living universe, so yes i can accept that and I also accept the Fact that God made This.

 

Well, if he made the universe he must have caused the Big Bang, which created the universe. I've been saying all through this long thread that it's possible that a supernatural being caused the Big Bang. However, since the Big Bang there is no scientific evidence for anything supernatural happening in the universe and nor is there any need to postulate one to explain what happens in the unuverse.

 

There is a God has been proven its just that some happen not to believe that there is a God and in their studies would rather give full credit to man and none to the Being who made the school for them to study at.

 

It hasn't been scientifically proven. If it had been almost all scientists would accept it. If you think it has been, please show me where I can see the scientific paper published about it (and there surely would be one!). Or just a synopsis of it. Or any scientific work done by scientists that showed any hint at all that a god exists.

 

Giving credit is irrelevant. Hindu scientists should give credit to Brahm, Jewish scientists to Yaweh, Aboriginal scientists to the Rainbow Serpent and so on. Whether or not they do, they don't think that the existence of a god has been scientifically proven.

 

You cannot be a scientist this im sure of because all of the scientist that i learn from and study with ALL have great appreciation for the human body, you have made a very stupid ignorant statement. The structure of the human being is so complex that we have been studing it for centuries we have yet to master the brain. Our structure is perfect in so many ways, you cannot be a true scientist a true scientist would not say such a thing

 

I'm not a scientist but I read a lot of science. Few scientists think that humans did not evolve from apes. Fewer medical doctors see the human body as unflawed.

Edited by packham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not a scientist but I read a lot of science. Few scientists think that humans did not evolve from apes. Fewer medical doctors see the human body as unflawed.

 

Well im studying science now and you are in no way close to vewing science for what it really is. You can read all the books you want if their by scientist who do not believe in God then your being influenced by that author, Try reading scientist books by authors who have a more balanced perspective, your giving onesided information and whats worst you dont even study science and you show no respect for the human body. If you really like reading books i would suggest that you pick up the Quran and try studying it take arabic classes and study the Quran, what do you have to lose??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

twoswordali, My argument here is very simple.

 

1. Take definition of "scientific" from encyclopedia or dictionary. By this I mean the physical sciences like physics, chemistry, etc. Not the social sciences.

2. See if the Qur'an matches the definition of "scientific". The Qur'an does not have any scientific theories, like general relativity, or quantum mechanics, so it is not scientific.

3. The Qur'an forms a basis for a person to conduct his life and how he should think. A person's life consists of many things and is not confined to just the physical sciences.

 

I agree with you that it is the Qur'an which urges to explore the world and to formulate the physical sciences. But that doesn't make the Qur'an scientific.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well im studying science now and you are in no way close to vewing science for what it really is. You can read all the books you want if their by scientist who do not believe in God then your being influenced by that author, Try reading scientist books by authors who have a more balanced perspective, your giving onesided information and whats worst you dont even study science and you show no respect for the human body. If you really like reading books i would suggest that you pick up the Quran and try studying it take arabic classes and study the Quran, what do you have to lose??

 

Of course I repect the human body. But I don't deny its flaws and inadequacies. I wish that we didn't have an appendix so people didn't pointlesly die, I wish childbirth had evolved differently so that it wasn't so painful and dangerous, I wish tooth enamel was tougher, I wish we didn't wear out in less than 100 years, I wish our sight, smell, taste were better ... there are lots of inherent problems with the human body.

 

Newton believed in god. Newton explained how much of the universe works, without the need for any supernatural being.

 

You say that the existence of god has been scientifically proven. Again, please tell me where I can read the scientific proof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, if credentials are needed, I did study physics and chem in high school and History & Philosphy of Science at uni. Also logic. I have worked as an editor of medical texts and I have a Conservation & Land Management qualification. However as I don't work in a scientific field I don't describe myself as a scientist.

Edited by packham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
twoswordali, My argument here is very simple.

 

1. Take definition of "scientific" from encyclopedia or dictionary. By this I mean the physical sciences like physics, chemistry, etc. Not the social sciences.

2. See if the Qur'an matches the definition of "scientific". The Qur'an does not have any scientific theories, like general relativity, or quantum mechanics, so it is not scientific.

3. The Qur'an forms a basis for a person to conduct his life and how he should think. A person's life consists of many things and is not confined to just the physical sciences.

 

 

Ok look brother you know and i know that we were not talking about the one particular aspect within the sceince sphere, forgive me if im wrong. Now as for the dictionary meaning as i stated in the post above

Science is the systematic study and knowledge of the natural or physical phenomena, and phenomena is anything appearing or observed or a remarkable person or thing Well the Quran gives us a systematic way to study with knowledge the natural and physical phenomena. What is the phenomena?By definition it is a remarkable person This is Muhammad and the other prophets individually representing a plural body as well as a single entity. And the other description of phenomena is a remarkable thing and God is a remarkable thing and what is a thing its some entity, object, or creature that is not or cannot be specifically designated or precisely described: The Quran is science the QURAN is scientific

 

2)Scientific is of the principles of science, by using the principles of Islam and the sunnah and studying the Quran makes approaching the Quran scientific.

 

 

 

I agree with you that it is the Qur'an which urges to explore the world and to formulate the physical sciences. But that doesn't make the Qur'an scientific.The Qur'an does not have any scientific theories, like general relativity, or quantum mechanics, so it is not scientific.

 

The Quran set the stage for us to develop in this world to be cultivators, it diesn't waste time with giving play by play instructions of what is minute details. Was those scientific therories possible without Allah?? Without the Quran would science advanced as far as it has?? No it wouldn't have The Quran sets the stage for the development of man and for us to be great cultivators so when we cultivate this land we must know who is teaching us and how we are able to learn. And that this is all possible because of Allah. And you say that the Quran is not scientific?? Because it doesent include theories that was made by the Quran in the first place and your looking at individual sections of science??? The Quran is science science explains our whole life every single aspect of it and the Quran give us the best science on how to go about our lives no matter what scientific slice of the sphere you wish to study in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course I repect the human body. But I don't deny its flaws and inadequacies. I wish that we didn't have an appendix so people didn't pointlesly die, I wish childbirth had evolved differently so that it wasn't so painful and dangerous, I wish tooth enamel was tougher, I wish we didn't wear out in less than 100 years, I wish our sight, smell, taste were better ... there are lots of inherent problems with the human body.

 

 

This is what the Quran says sura 2 ayat 96'"You will indeed find them of all people, most greedy of life even more than the idoaters, each one of them wishes he could be given a life of a thousand years, but the grant of such life will not save him from punishment for Allah sees well all that they do"

 

Newton believed in god. Newton explained how much of the universe works, without the need for any supernatural being.

 

Newton firstly established that there is a God then he went on to cultivate the land the God had made for us he believed that there was a God he explained how the universe works but he firstly established that He believes in God and then he studied Gods works.

 

0You say that the existence of god has been scientifically proven. Again, please tell me where I can read the scientific proof.

 

Again i tell you please try and study the Quran see if you can enroll in some arabic classes study the Quran what do you have to lose and when you finish if you still dont believe in God then atleast you would have learned a language that will get you a job anywhere in the world.

 

BTW, if credentials are needed, I did study physics and chem in high school and History & Philosphy of Science at uni. Also logic. I have worked as an editor of medical texts and I have a Conservation & Land Management qualification. However as I don't work in a scientific field I don't describe myself as a scientist.

 

Woah put the brakes on i never asked for your credentials i just assumed by the way you wrote that you were no scientist and you confirmed that, that you wasn't. No need to strut around like a pea#### i respect you as an intellectual human being thats why im conversing with you there is no threat here you can put your feathers down if i wanted to attack you i would bypass your feathers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×