Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Sign in to follow this  
wiseguy

A Very Important Christian Missionary Converted To Islam

Recommended Posts

Dr. Gary Miller (Abdul-Ahad Omar) Converts to Islam

 

A very important Christian missionary converted to Islam and became a major herald for Islam, he was a very active missionary and was very knowledgeable about the Bible. This man likes mathematics so much, that's why he likes logic. One day, he decided to read the Qur'an to try to find any mistakes that he might take advantage of while inviting Muslims to convert to Christianity. He expected the Qur'an to be an old book written 14 centuries ago, a book that talks about the desert and so on. He was amazed from what he found.

 

He discovered that this Book had what no other book in the world has. He expected to find some stories about the hard time that the Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) had, like the death of his wife Khadijah (may Allah be pleased with her) or the death of his sons and daughters. However, he did not find anything like that. And what made him even more confused is that he found a full "Sura" (chapter) in the Qur'an named "Mary" that contains a lot of respect to Mary (peace be upon her) which is not the case even in the books written by Christians nor in their Bibles. He did not find a Sura named after "Fatimah"(the prophet's daughter) nor "Aishah" (the Prophet's wife), may Allah (God) be pleased with both of them. He also found that the name of Jesus (Peace Be Upon Him) was mentioned in the Qur'an 25 times while the name of "Muhammad" (Peace Be Upon Him) was mentioned only 4 times, so he became more confused. He started reading the Qur'an more thoroughly hoping to find a mistake but he was shocked when he read a great verse which is verse number 82 in Surat Al-Nisa'a (Women) that says:

 

Do they not consider the Qur'an (with care)? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancy”.

 

Dr Miller says about this verse: “One of the well known scientific principles is the principle of finding mistakes or looking for mistakes in a theory until it’s proved to be right (Falsification Test). What’s amazing is that the Holy Qur'an asks Muslims and non-muslims to try to find mistakes in this book and it tells them that they will never find any”. He also says about this verse: "No writer in the world has the courage to write a book and say that it’s empty of mistakes, but the Qur'an, on the contrary, tells you that it has no mistakes and asks you to try to find one and you won’t find any."

 

Another verse that Dr Miller reflected on for a long time is the verse number 30 in Surat “Al-Anbiya” (The Prophets):

 

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

 

He says: ”This verse is exactly the subject of the scientific research that won the Noble Prize in 1973 and was about the theory of the 'Great Explosion'. According to this theory, the universe was the result of a great explosion that lead to the formation of the universe with its skies and planets."

 

Dr Miller says: “Now we come to what’s amazing about the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and what’s pretended about the devils helping him, God says:

 

No evil ones have brought down this (Revelation), it would neither suit them nor would they be able (to produce it). Indeed they have been removed far from even (a chance of) hearing it.” The Holy Qur'an, Chapter 26, Verses 210-212.

 

When thou does read the Qur'an, seek Allah's protection from Satan the Rejected One” The Holy Qur'an, Chapter 16, Verse 98.

 

You see? Can this be the devil’s way to write a book? how can he write a book then tells you to ask God for protection from this devil before reading that book? Those are miraculous verses in this miraculous book! and has a logical answer to those who pretend that it’s from the devil”.

 

And among the stories that amazed Dr Miller is the story of the Prophet(PBUH) with Abu-Lahab. Dr Miller says: “This man (Abu Lahab) used to hate Islam so much that he would go after the Prophet wherever he goes to humiliate him. If he saw the prophet talking to strangers, he used to wait till he finishes and then ask them: What did Muhammad tell you? If he said it’s white then it’s in reality black and if he said it’s night then it’s day. He meant to falsify all what the prophet says and to make people suspicious about it. And 10 years before the death of Abu Lahab, a Sura was inspired to the prophet, named “Al-Masad”. This sura tells that Abu Lahab will go to hell, in other words, it says that Abu Lahab will not convert to Islam. During 10 years, Abu Lahab could have said: “Muhammad is saying that I will not become a Muslim and that I will go to the hell fire, but I’m telling you now that I want to convert to Islam and become a Muslim. What do you think about Muhammad now? Is he saying the truth or no? Does his inspiration come from God?”. But Abu Lahab did not do that at all although he was disobeying the prophet in all matters, but not in this one. In other words, it was as if the prophet(PBUH) was giving Abu Lahab a chance to prove him wrong! But he did not do that during 10 whole years! he did not convert to Islam and did not even pretend to be a Muslim!! Throughout 10 years, he had the chance to destroy Islam in one minute! But this did not happen because those are not the words of Muhammad (PBUH) but the words of God Who knows what’s hidden and knows that Abu Lahab will not become a Muslim.

 

How can the prophet (PBUH) know that Abu Lahab will prove what is said in that Sura if this was not inspiration from Allah? How can he be sure throughout 10 whole years that what he has (the Qur'an) is true if he did not know that it’s inspiration from Allah?? For a person to take such a risky challenge, this has only one meaning: that this is inspiration from God.

 

Perish the hands of the Father of Flame (Abu Lahab)! perish he! No profit to him from all his wealth, and all his gains! Burnt soon will he be in a Fire of blazing Flame! His wife shall carry the (crackling) wood; As fuel! A twisted rope of palm-leaf fibre round her (own) neck!” The Holy Qur'an, Chapter 111.

 

Dr Miller says about a verse that amazed him: One of the miracles in the Qur'an is challenging the future with things that humans cannot predict and to which the “Falsification Test” applies, this test consists of looking for mistakes until the thing that is being tested is proved to be right. For example, let’s see what the Qur'an said about the relation between Muslims and Jews. Qur'an says that Jews are the major enemies for Muslims and this is true until now as the main enemy for Muslims are the Jews.

 

Dr Miller continues: This is considered a great challenge since the Jews have the chance to ruin Islam simply by treating Muslims in a friendly way for few years and then say: here we are treating you as friends and the Qur'an says that we are your enemies, the Qur'an must be wrong then! But this did not happen during 1400 years!! and it will never happen because those are the words of The One who knows the unseen (God) and not the words of humans.

 

Dr Miller continues: Can you see how the verse that talks about the enmity between Muslims and Jews constitutes a challenge to the human mind?

 

Strongest among men in enmity to the Believers wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans; and nearest among them in love to the Believers wilt thou find those who say, "We are Christians": because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant. And when they listen to the revelation received by the Messenger, thou wilt see their eyes overflowing with tears, for they recognize the truth: they pray: "Our Lord! We believe; write us down among the witnesses” The Holy Qur'an, Chapter 5, Verses 82-84.

 

This verse applies to Dr Miller as he was a Christian but when he knew the truth, he believed and converted to Islam and became a herald. May Allah support him.

 

Dr Miller says about the unique style of the Qur'an that he finds wonderful: No doubt there is something unique and amazing in Qur'an that is not present anywhere else, as the Qur'an gives you a specific information and tells you that you did not know this before. For example:

 

"This is part of the tidings of the things unseen, which We reveal unto thee (O Prophet!) by inspiration: thou was not with them when they cast lots with arrows, as to which of them should be charged with the care of Maryam: nor was thou with them when they disputed (the point)” The Holy Qur'an, Chapter 3, Verse 44.

 

Such are some of the stories of the Unseen, which We have revealed unto thee: before this, neither thou nor thy People knew them. So persevere patiently: for the End is for those who are righteous” The Holy Qur'an, Chapter 11, Verse 49.

 

Such is one of the stories of what happened unseen, which We reveal by inspiration unto thee: nor was thou (present) with them when they concerted their plans together in the process of weaving their plots” The Holy Qur'an, Chapter 12, Verse 102.

 

Dr Miller continues: “No other holy book uses this style, all the other books consist of information that tells you where this information came from. For example, when the Holy Bible talks about the stories of the ancient nations, it tells you that a this King lived in a this place and a that leader fought in that battle, and that a certain person had a number of kids and their names are. But this book (Bible) always tells you that if you want to know more, you can read a certain book since that information came from that book”.

 

Dr Garry Miller continues: “This is in contrary to the Qur'an which gives you the information and tells you that it’s new!! And what’s amazing is that the people of Mecca at that time (time of inspiration of those verses) used to hear those verses and the challenge that the information in those verses was new and was not known by Muhammad (PBUH) nor by his people at that time, and despite that, they never said: We know this and it is not new, and they did not say: We know where Muhammad came from with those verses. This never happened, but what happened is that nobody dared to say that he was lying to them because those was really new information, not coming from the human mind but from Allah who knows the unseen in the past, the present and the future”.

 

Source: (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetthetruecall(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/home/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=215"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetthetruecall(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/home/modules.ph...cle&sid=215[/url]

 

Dr. Gary Miller (Abdul-Ahad Omar)

garymiller.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

Salamu alaykum,

 

mashallah mashallah mashallah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Difference between the Bible and the Qur'an

Based on a transcript of a lecture by Dr. Gary Miller

 

The Bible is a collection of writings by many different authors. The Qur'an is a dictation. The speaker in the Qur'an - in the first person - is God talking directly to man. In the Bible you have many men writing about God and you have in some places the word of God speaking to men and still in other places you have some men simply writing about history. The Bible consists of 66 small books. About 18 of them begin by saying: This is the revelation God gave to so and so… The rest make no claim as to their origin. You have for example the beginning of the book of Jonah which begins by saying: The word of the Lord came to Jonah the son of Elmitaeh saying… quote and then it continues for two or three pages.

 

If you compare that to one of the four accounts of the life of Jesus, Luke begins by saying: “many people have written about this man, it seems fitting for me to do so too”. That is all… no claim of saying “ these words were given to me by God here they are for you it is a revelation”, there is no mention of this.

 

The Bible does not contain self-reference, that is, the word 'Bible' is not in the Bible. Nowhere does the Bible talk about itself. Some scriptures are sometimes pointed to in the Bible, say: Here where it talks about itself, but we have to look closely. 2nd Timothy 3:16 is the favourite which reads: “All scripture is inspired of God” and there are those who would say, here is where the Bible it talks about itself, it says it is inspired of God, all of it. But if you read the whole sentence, you read that this was a letter wrote by Paul to Timothy and the entire sentence says to Timothy: “Since you were a young man you have studied the holy scriptures, all scriptures inspired by God” and so on… When Timothy was a young man the New Testament did not exist, the only thing that stems he was talking about are scriptures – which are only a portion of the Bible - from before that time. It could not have meant the whole Bible.

 

There is at the end of the Bible a verse which says: “Let anyone who takes away from this book or adds to this book be cursed”. This to is sometimes pointed to me saying: Here is where it sums itself as a whole. But look again and you will see that when it says: Let no one change this book, it is talking about that last book, number 66, the Book of Revelation. It has too, because any reference will tell you that the Book of Revelation was written before certain other parts of the Bible were written. It happens today to be stacked at the end, but there are other parts that came after, so it can not be referring to the entire book.

 

It is an extreme position held only by some Christian groups that the Bible – in its entirety - cover to cover is the revealed word of God in every word, but they do a clever thing when they mention this, or make this claim. They will say that the Bible in its entirety is the word of God; inerrant (no mistakes) in the original writings. So if you go to the Bible and point out some mistakes that are in it you are going to be told: Those mistakes were not there in the original manuscript, they have crept in so that we see them there today. They are going on problem in that position. There is a verse in the Bible Isaiah 40:8 which in fact is so well known that some Bibles printed it on the inside front cover as an introduction and it says : “ The grass weathers, the flower fades, but the word of our God stands forever”. Here is a claim in the Bible that the word of God will stand forever, it will not be corrupted, it won't be lost. So if today you find a mistake in the Bible you have two choices. Either that promise was false that when God said my word wont fade away, he was mistaken, or the portion which has the mistake in it was not a part of the word of God in the first place, because the promise was that it would be safeguarded, it would not be corrupted.

 

I have suggested many times that there are mistakes in the Bible and the accusation comes back very quickly: Show me one. Well there are hundreds. If you want to be specific I can mention few. You have for example at 2nd Samuel 10:18 a description of a war fought by David saying that he killed 7000 men and that he also killed 40000 men on horsebacks. In 1st Chronicles 19 it mentions the same episode saying that he killed 70000 men and the 40000 men were not on horsebacks, they were on foot. The point be what is the difference between the pedestrian and not is very fundamental.

 

Matthew 27:5 says that Judas Iscariot when he died he hung himself. Acts 1 says that no he jumped off a cliff head first. If you study Logic very soon you will come in your course to what they call an “undecidable propositions” or “meaningless sentences” or statements that can not be decided because there is no contextual false. One of the classic examples sited is something called the Effeminites paradox. This man was Cretan and he said “Cretans always lie”, now was that statement true or false? If he was a Cretan and he says that they always lie is he lying? If he is not lying then he is telling the truth then the Cretans don’t always lie ! You see it can not be true and it can not be false, the statement turns back on itself. It is like saying “What I am telling you right now is a lie” would you believe that or not? You see the statement has no true content. It can not be true and it can not be false. If it is true it is always false. If it is false it is also true.

 

Well in the Bible at Titus 1:12 the writer is Paul and he is talking about the Cretans. He says that one of their own men – a prophet - said “Cretans always lie” and he says that what this man says is true. It is a small mistake, but the point is that it is a human mistake, you don’t find that if you carefully examine the true content of that statement. It can not be a true statement.

 

To be continued.

 

Source: (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetmissionislam(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/comprel/diffbibquran.htm"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetmissionislam(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/comprel/diffbibquran.htm[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Difference between the Bible and the Qur'an (Continued)

 

Based on a transcript of a lecture by Dr. Gary Miller

 

Now I come back to the Qur'an, and as I mentioned the speaker in the Qur'an is - in the first person - is God. The book claims throughout that it is the word of God. It names itself 70 times as the Qur'an. It talks about its own contents. It has self-reference. The Qur'an states in the first Sura after Fatiha that “This is the book, there is no doubt in it, it is a guidance for those who are conscious of God” and so on and so on… It begins that way and continues that way stressing that. And there is one very amazing statement in the Qur'an when you come to the fourth Sura 82nd Ayah which says to those who say Qur'an is something else than the word of God. It challenges them saying: “Have they not considered the Qur'an, if it came from someone other than God they will find in it many mistakes”. Some of you are students, would you dare to hand in a paper after you completed a research work or something at the bottom you put down there “You wont find mistakes in this”. Would you dare to challenge your professor that way?. Well the Qur'an does that. It is telling: If you really think you know where this came from then starts looking for mistakes because you wont find any. Another interesting thing the Qur'an does is that it quotes all its critics. There has never - in hundreds of years - ever been some suggestion as to where that book came from but that the Qur'an does not already mention that objection and reply to it. Many times you will find the Ayah saying something like: Do they say such and such and so, say to them such and such and so. In every case there is a reply. More than that the Qur'an claims that the evidence of its origin is in itself, and that if you look at this book you will be convinced.

 

So the difference in Christianity and Islam comes down to a difference of authority and appeal to authority. The Christian wants to appeal to the Bible and the Muslim wants to appeal to the Qur'an. You can not stop by saying: This is true because me book say it is, and somebody else would say something else is true because my book says differently, you can not stop at that point, and the Qur'an does not. The Christians may point to some words that it is recorded Jesus said and say this proves my point. But the Muslim does not simply open his book and say: No, no the Qur'an says this, because the Qur'an does not simply deny something the Bible says and say something else instead. The Qur'an takes the form of a rebuttal, it is a guidance as the opening says (Huda lil mutakeen). So that for every suggestion that the Christian may say: My Bible say such and such, the Qur'an will not simply say: No that is not true, it will say: Do they say such and such then ask them such and such. You have for example the Ayah that compares Jesus and Adam. There are those who may say that Jesus must have been God (Son of God) because he had no father. He had a woman who was his mother, but there was no human father. It was God that gave him life, so he must have been God’s son. The Qur'an reminds the Christian in one short sentence to remember Adam - who was his father ? - and in fact, who was his mother ? He did not have a father either and in fact he did not have a mother, but what does that make him? So that the likeness of Adam is the likeness of Jesus, they were nothing and then they became something; that they worship God.

 

So that the Qur'an does not demand belief - the Qur'an invites belief, and here is the fundamental difference. It is not simply delivered as: Here is what you are to believe, but throughout the Qur'an the statements are always: Have you O man thought of such and such, have you considered so and so. It is always an invitation for you to look at the evidence; now what do you believe ?

 

The citation of the Bible very often takes the form of what is called in Argumentation: Special Pleading. Special Pleading is when implications are not consistent. When you take something and you say: Well that must mean this, but you don’t use the same argument to apply it to something else. To give an example, I have seen it in publications many times, stating that Jesus must have been God because he worked miracles. In other hand we know very well that there is no miracle ever worked by Jesus that is not also recorded in the Old Testament as worked by one of the prophets. You had amongst others, Elijah, who is reported to have cured the leper, raise the dead boy to life and to have multiplied bread for the people to eat - three of the most favourite miracles cited by Jesus. If the miracles worked by Jesus proved he was God, why don’t they prove Elijah was God ? This is Special Pleading, if you see what I mean. The implications are not consistent. If this implies that then in that case it must also imply the same thing. We have those who would say Jesus was God because he was taken up in the heaven. But the Bible also says the a certain Einah did not die he was taken up into the heaven by God. Whether it is true or not, who knows, but the point is if Jesus being taken up proves he is God, why does not it prove Einah was God? The same thing happened to him.

 

To be continued.

 

Source: (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetmissionislam(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/comprel/diffbibquran.htm"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetmissionislam(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/comprel/diffbibquran.htm[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Difference between the Bible and the Qur'an (Continued)

 

Based on a transcript of a lecture by Dr. Gary Miller

 

I wrote to a man one time, who wrote a book about Christianity and I had some of the objections I mentioned to you now. And his reply to me was that I am making matters difficult to myself, that there are portions in the Bible that are crystal clear and that there are portions that are difficult, and that my problem was that I am looking at the difficult part instead of the clear parts. The problem is that this is an exercise in self deception - why are some parts clear and some parts difficult? It is because somebody decided what this clearly means, now that makes this very difficult. To give you an example, John Chapter 14 a certain man said to Jesus: Show us God, and Jesus said: If you have seen me you have seen God. Now without reading on the Christian will say: See Jesus claimed to be God, he said if you have seen me you have seen God. If that is crystal clear then you have a difficult portion when you go back just a few pages to Chapter 5 when another man came to Jesus and said show us God and he said you have never seen God you have never heard his voice. Now what did he mean there if on the other occasion he meant that he was God? Obviously you have made matters difficult by deciding what the first one meant. If you read on in Chapter 14 you will see what he went on to say. He was saying the closest you are going to seeing God are the works you see me doing.

 

It is a fact that the words “son of God” are not found on the lips of Jesus anywhere in the first three Gospel accounts, he was always calling himself the Son of Man. And it is a curious form of reasoning that I have seen so often that it is established from Bible that he claimed to be God because - look how the Jews reacted. They will say for example he said such and such and the Jews said he is blaspheming, he claimed to be God and they tried to stone him. So they argue that he must have been claiming to be God because look ! - the Jews tried to kill him. They said that’s what he was claiming. But the interesting thing is that all the evidence is then built on the fact that a person is saying: I believed that Jesus was the son of God because the Jews who killed him said that’s what he used to say ! His enemies used to say that, so he must have said it, this is what it amounts to. In other hand we have the words of Jesus saying he would keep the law, the law of Moses and we have the statement in the Bible, why did the Jews kill him ? Because he broke the law of Moses. Obviously the Jews misunderstood him, if he promised he would keep the law, but they killed him because he broke the law, they must have misunderstood him, or lied about him.

 

(To be continued)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Difference between the Bible and the Qur'an (Continued)

 

Based on a transcript of a lecture by Dr. Gary Miller

 

When I talk about the Bible and quote various verses here and there I am often accused of putting things out of context, to say you have lifted something out of what it was talking about and given it a meaning. I don’t want to respond to the accusation as such, but it doesn’t seem to occur to many people that perhaps those who wrote portions of the Bible in the first place were guilty of the same thing. Maybe they – some of those writers - believed a certain thing and in order to prove it quoted from their scriptures – the Old Testament, the Hebrew writings - quoted out of context to prove their point. There are examples of that kind of thing. In Matthew 2 it said that a king wanted to kill the young child Jesus so he with his family went to Egypt, and they stayed there until that king died, and then they came back. When the writer of Matthew, whoever he was, because the name Matthew wont be found in the book of Matthew; when he described this event saying that he came back out of Egypt, he said: “ This was to fulfil a prophecy which is written” and then he quotes Hosea Chapter 11 “Out of Egypt I called my Son”. So he said because Jesus went to Egypt and then came back out of Egypt and we have this passage in the Hebrew scriptures “out of Egypt I called my son” Jesus must have been the son of God. If you look and see what he was quoting, Hosea 11:1 he quotes the second half of a complete sentence, the complete sentence reads: “When israel was young I loved him and out of Egypt I called my son”. israel the nation was considered as the son of God. Moses was told to go to Pharaoh and say to him: If you touch that nation of people, you touch my son; warning him, warning Pharaoh: don’t touch that nation, calling the nation “the son of God”. So that this is the only thing talked about in Hosea 11:1. “Out of Egypt I called my son” can only refer to the nation of israel. I mentioned this point some months ago here in another talk, to which a young lady with us objected that israel is a symbolic name for Jesus. You will have a hard time finding that anywhere in the Bible because it isn’t there. You can take an index of the Bible and lookup the word “israel” everywhere the word occurs and you will find no where in any place that you can connect the word israel with Jesus. But never mind - suppose it is true, read on, the second verse says “and after that he kept on worshipping Bal”, because this is what the israelites were guilty of, very often they kept falling back into Idol worshipping. So if that “israel” really meant Jesus and it means that Jesus is the son of God that came out of Egypt they must also mean that Jesus from time to time used to bow down to that idol Bal. You have to be consistent, and follow through on what it says. So the point is whoever wrote Matthew and Chapter 2 was trying to prove a point by quoting something out of context, and he undid himself, because if you follow through on it, it can not be so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allahu Akbr

Allahu Akbr

Allahu Akbr

 

 

I saw just few weeks back a lecture he did with Shiekh Ahmed deedat in south Africa ( may Allah grant mr. deedat al jannah), I had a feeling about this Garry miller wallah he sounded Muslim then even the christens said you sound muslim.. Good news indeed I'm so excited it's crazy MashaAllah Tbark Allah..

 

here is the link to the first part of the lecture (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetyoutube(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/watch?v=Q1NWC2ZGOKc"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetyoutube(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/watch?v=Q1NWC2ZGOKc[/url]

 

Fe Amn Allah

Al Faqeera ela Allah

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just posted a comment in another thread which is of essentially the same topic, so I thought my comment would be relevant here too:

 

 

It's worth pointing out that although there are of course a few (very few) converts of scientists to Islam (as there are as many such cases to Christianity, Hinduism, etc), it has no bearing whatsoever on the truth of Islam. It seems quite desperate for many of you to gain so much reassurance from these few silly cases, whilst ignoring the big picture. In fact, is your faith really that weak that you need to make a big hoo-haa on every convert?

 

Anyway, let me paint the big picture for you: According to the recent surveys carried out at some top scientific institutes (such as the Royal Society, and the National Academy of Science), 90% are non-believers. Of the remaining 10% that do believe in a god, essentially 0% are Muslim. (Furthermore, the minority of these 10% are actually qualified in the fields of science which are relevant to the deep questions of the universe (e.g. physics, biology, etc)).

 

Also, if anything, Islam has stunted science in modern times. To illustrate this: Turkey is among the most productive Islamic countries in the world regarding scientific research, and yet over a 9 year period, the country as a whole published as many scientific papers as a single Ivy League university does within a single year!

 

Nevertheless, as pathetic as it may seem to me, who am I to stop you taking solace in these dozen outliers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam Lucid

It's worth pointing out that although there are of course a few (very few) converts of scientists to Islam (as there are as many such cases to Christianity, Hinduism, etc), it has no bearing whatsoever on the truth of Islam.

Quite a baseless statement. Why don't you give references like a good critic? On the contrary, because of the science present in the Quran there have been many converts. Just google:scientist converted to Islam.

It seems quite desperate for many of you to gain so much reassurance from these few silly cases, whilst ignoring the big picture.

They may be silly to you but they are not for us. The ultimate big picture is that Islam is the truth. These converts testify that hence we are definitely not ignoring the big picture.

In fact, is your faith really that weak that you need to make a big hoo-haa on every convert?

People with strong faith are also allowed to make a big hoo-haa on every convert. The fact is, everytime a person accepts a truth of Islam and leaves his previous faith, he has made big strides towards God. And that is definitely worth "hoo-haaing" about.

Anyway, let me paint the big picture for you: According to the recent surveys carried out at some top scientific institutes (such as the Royal Society, and the National Academy of Science), 90% are non-believers. Of the remaining 10% that do believe in a god, essentially 0% are Muslim. (Furthermore, the minority of these 10% are actually qualified in the fields of science which are relevant to the deep questions of the universe (e.g. physics, biology, etc))

You gave no references. Unless you spearheaded this survey, how can I believe you? Furthermore: an article in Reader’s Digest ‘Almanac’, year book 1986, gave the statistics of the increase of percentage of the major religions of the world in half a century from 1934 to 1984. This article also appeared in ‘The Plain Truth’ magazine. At the top was Islam, which increased by 235%, and Christianity had increased only by 47%. And when you go to Islamic forums, there is a separate section for converts/reverts/new Muslims but there is no separate section for Christian converts in Christian forums. Why?

Also, if anything, Islam has stunted science in modern times. To illustrate this: Turkey is among the most productive Islamic countries in the world regarding scientific research, and yet over a 9 year period, the country as a whole published as many scientific papers as a single Ivy League university does within a single year!

Not Islam, Muslims are less productive when it comes to scientific research. You know why? It is because Muslims are not as close to Islam as they were before. Take the example of Turkey. You call it an Islamic country but a large chunk of Turks consider themselves to be secular, not Islamic. Hence that explains the fact you gave (without any sort of reference so I don't even know whether its right or not. If the West is so good in science why don't Westerners give references) When we were close to Islam, we spearheaded science.

you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/Timeline_of_s...e_Islamic_world

you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age

Now Inshallah we will be close to Islam again (thanks to so many converts) and then we will be back in the field of Science

Peace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just posted a comment in another thread which is of essentially the same topic, so I thought my comment would be relevant here too:

It's worth pointing out that although there are of course a few (very few) converts of scientists to Islam (as there are as many such cases to Christianity, Hinduism, etc), it has no bearing whatsoever on the truth of Islam. It seems quite desperate for many of you to gain so much reassurance from these few silly cases, whilst ignoring the big picture. In fact, is your faith really that weak that you need to make a big hoo-haa on every convert?

 

Anyway, let me paint the big picture for you: According to the recent surveys carried out at some top scientific institutes (such as the Royal Society, and the National Academy of Science), 90% are non-believers. Of the remaining 10% that do believe in a god, essentially 0% are Muslim. (Furthermore, the minority of these 10% are actually qualified in the fields of science which are relevant to the deep questions of the universe (e.g. physics, biology, etc)).

 

Also, if anything, Islam has stunted science in modern times. To illustrate this: Turkey is among the most productive Islamic countries in the world regarding scientific research, and yet over a 9 year period, the country as a whole published as many scientific papers as a single Ivy League university does within a single year!

 

Nevertheless, as pathetic as it may seem to me, who am I to stop you taking solace in these dozen outliers?

 

I have read your post above and I find that it reflects your frustration on the rapid spread of Islam all over the world. After all, there are atheists who have left atheism for Islam and now they become Muslims. Do you want their names?

 

I think you should answer my question: Why did Europeans study science, mathematics, physics, medicine etc at Islamic universities during the Islamic Golden Age and the Dark Ages of Europe? In other word, Muslims had contributed so much to the world civilization and the West owes so much to Muslims.

 

I can name the scientists who have converted to Islam if you want. I am waiting for your response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Salam Lucid

 

Quite a baseless statement. Why don't you give references like a good critic? On the contrary, because of the science present in the Quran there have been many converts. Just google:scientist converted to Islam.

 

Im sure there is much in the Quran that is quite interesting, I like the first surah that talks about other worlds. There is much of interest in other religions as well.

 

Einstein did comment that Buddhism "contains a much stronger element of [the cosmic religious feeling, by which] the religious geniuses of all ages have been distinguished."Albert Einstein, "Religion and Science". New York Times Magazine, 9 November 1930 reprinted in Ideas and Opinions, ISBN 0-517-00393-7, p. 36.

 

Niels Bohr, who developed the Bohr Model of the atom, said,

“ For a parallel to the lesson of atomic theory...[we must turn] to those kinds of epistemological problems with which already thinkers like the Buddha and Lao Tzu have been confronted, when trying to harmonize our position as spectators and actors in the great drama of existence.1958 Neils Bohr, Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge, (edited by John Wiley and Sons, 1958) p. 20.

 

British mathematician, philosopher and Nobel Prize winner Alfred North Whitehead (co-author, with Bertrand Russell, of Principia Mathematica, widely considered by specialists in the subject to be one of the most important and seminal works in mathematical logic and philosophy) declared, "Buddhism is the most colossal example in the history of applied metaphysics."Whitehead, Alfred North. (1996). Religion in the Making: Lowell lectures 1926. ISBN 0-823-21645-4, pg. 50.

 

Bertrand Russell, another Nobel Prize winner, discovered a superior scientific method—one that reconciled the speculative and the rational while investigating the ultimate questions of life:

“ Buddhism is a combination of both speculative and scientific philosophy. It advocates the scientific method and pursues that to a finality that may be called Rationalistic. In it are to be found answers to such questions of interest as: 'What is mind and matter? Of them, which is of greater importance? Is the universe moving towards a goal? What is man's position? Is there living that is noble?' It takes up where science cannot lead because of the limitations of the latter's instruments. Its conquests are those of the mind.

 

The American physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer made an analogy to Buddhism when describing the Heisenberg uncertainty principle thusly:

“ If we ask, for instance, whether the position of the electron remains the same, we must say 'no;' if we ask whether the electron's position changes with time, we must say 'no;' if we ask whether the electron is at rest, we must say 'no;' if we ask whether it is in motion, we must say 'no.' The Buddha has given such answers when interrogated as to the conditions of man's self after his death; but they are not familiar answers for the tradition of seventeenth and eighteenth-century science.J. R. Oppenheimer, Science and the Common Understanding, (Oxford University Press, 1954) pp 8-9.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam Lars

My knowledge regarding Buddhism is quite rudimentary. The info you gave was really interesting. Now let's compare "Science in Buddhism" and "Science in Quran". Muslims normally quote verses from Quran which give prescientific knowledge and then represent the opinion of Islam regarding Science (as done in this site :ww w.quranmiracles.co m) I would really want to know those verses regarding science in the Buddhist scriptures. And you only mentioned Buddhism's opinion regarding metaphysics. Are there any Buddhism's comments regarding other branches of Science such as biology, Astronomy, Mathematics etc? Furthermore, Muslims claim that there is not a single unscientific verse in the Quran (though there are some verses which have been misinterpreted by critics as unscientific but actually do not contradict Science at all). Do Buddhists claim the same thing?

Peace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam,

 

I would like to direct this towards ######.

 

You wrote:

 

"After all, there are atheists who have left atheism for Islam and now they become Muslims. Do you want their names?

"

 

I believe you are talking to Lucid. Dear ######, what difference does it make that atheists became Muslims? Does it convince people? I think we should focus more on being convincing and productive.

 

Secondly, you wrote:

 

"I think you should answer my question: Why did Europeans study science, mathematics, physics, medicine etc at Islamic universities during the Islamic Golden Age and the Dark Ages of Europe? In other word, Muslims had contributed so much to the world civilization and the West owes so much to Muslims.

"

 

I do not think that he should answer that dear ######, again I do not see why this even matters. Secondly, the west does not owe us, but we all owe God for giving us the knowledge. We should not be puffed up with pride, not accusing you of it, to say such things which are not necessary like the above statement.

 

Just an advice dear ######.

 

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Salaam,

 

I would like to direct this towards ######.

 

You wrote:

 

"After all, there are atheists who have left atheism for Islam and now they become Muslims. Do you want their names?

"

 

I believe you are talking to Lucid. Dear ######, what difference does it make that atheists became Muslims? Does it convince people? I think we should focus more on being convincing and productive.

 

My message is there are some educated atheists who leave atheism for Islam because they do not believe in atheism any more.

 

Secondly, you wrote:

 

"I think you should answer my question: Why did Europeans study science, mathematics, physics, medicine etc at Islamic universities during the Islamic Golden Age and the Dark Ages of Europe? In other word, Muslims had contributed so much to the world civilization and the West owes so much to Muslims."

 

This is a historical fact and neither you nor Lucid can deny it.

 

I do not think that he should answer that dear ######, again I do not see why this even matters.

 

Who are you to say that? I am not asking you to answer the question? The fact is I am asking Lucid to answer the question because he is downplaying Muslim's contribution to the world civilization.

 

Secondly, the west does not owe us, but we all owe God for giving us the knowledge. We should not be puffed up with pride, not accusing you of it, to say such things which are not necessary like the above statement.

 

Yes Allah gives us the knowledge and we are very thankful to Allah and Muslims allowed non-Muslims including the Europeans to study at Islamic universities during the Dark Ages of Europe so the West owes Muslims and you cannot deny it. If you deny it, you deny history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lars,

 

Did / do the scientists know the Holy Quran, the haddiths, sunnah and Islam very well? I have read your statement above and I find that they did not nor do not reject the truth of Islam .

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  

×