Search and find articles and topics quickly and accurately! See different advanced ways to search for articles on this site.
Rebuttal to Answering-Islams: "Scientific Errors of the Qur’an"
(Book: Behind the veil, unmasking Islam)
Response by Mahir
Article found at: http://answering-islam.org/BehindVeil/btv6.html#CH6
(Also found at: http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles.htm#science)
Our Muslim brothers believe that the Qur’an is the book of God and that it pre-existed with God from eternity. They believe God then revealed it to Muhammad by the arch-angel Gabriel on different occasions through the course of several years. This was Muhammad’s claim which he related to them. At first, Muhammad was not sure of this process; he was unsure and afraid to make such claims. Later, however, he became very sure.
Nothing to respond to!
For now, however, we would like to shed some light on the Qur’an and its contents in order to reveal the amazing truth to our brethren, the Muslims, few of whom have read what the great authors of Islam have said about the Qur’an. They would also be very surprised to discover that Muhammad’s companions as well as the rightly guided Caliphs said that some parts of the Qur’an were lost. Moreover, the Qur’an was subjected to perversion and alteration and Muhammad’s companions disagreed over some chapters of the Qur’an, some verses and their meanings. It is almost impossible for Muslims to imagine such things about their book which they dearly regard and respect. The sacred halo which encompasses the Qur’an must be dispelled and the veil which covers its face must be removed. If this disturbs and annoys Muslims, it will also help them to wake up from the slumber of their delusion which does not benefit them at all, but rather hurts them instead Those who love the truth and would like to worship the only true God faithfully and truthfully will be filled with real joy.
" They would also be very surprised to discover that Muhammad’s companions as well as the rightly guided Caliphs said that some parts of the Qur’an were lost"
I would love to see proof for this!
Maybe he is
referring to when Umar (ra) feared that people will stop practicing the
“stoning punishment”, when people do not find it in the Qur’an, they will stop
practicing it! I do not see “Lost” parts, I see Umar fearing that people will
not find a verse talking about Stoning.
"Moreover, the Qur’an was subjected to perversion and alteration and Muhammad’s companions disagreed over some chapters of the Qur’an, some verses and their meanings"
As for the Qur'an being subjected to perversion and alteration is a lie, and I would love to see A-i.com trying to prove this! As for the "Disagreement" over some verses; they never disagreed over laws and such matters, this is completely normal, Allah left some parts unexplained so they disagreed over these parts, such as “By the Tariq, what shall teach you what is the Tariq” and so on.
Biblical commentators disagree a lot:
Jamieson says that verse; Job 9:6 is a metaphor:
6. The earth is regarded, poetically, as resting on pillars, which tremble in an earthquake (Ps 75:3; Isa 24:20). The literal truth as to the earth is given (Job 26:7).
While Wesley does not see it as a metaphor:
9:6 The earth - Great portions of it, by earthquakes, or by removing islands. Pillars - The deep and inward parts of it, which like pillars supported those parts that appear to our view.
So, is this a Biblical error?
We will start by pointing out the Qur’an’s scientific, historical, and grammatical errors, namely those which deviate from the well-known rules of Arabic grammar. Muslims believe that the inimitability of the Qur’an is found in the eloquence and excellence of the Arabic language in which it is written; thus, it is impossible for them to imagine that the language of the Qur’an is full of errors. First, however, we will be content to allude to three scientific errors pertaining to the sun, earth and the two phenomena of thunder and lighting.
In plain words, the Qur’an says that one of the righteous men of God’s servants saw the sun set in a certain place of the earth—in particular a well full of water and mud. There, this man found some people. Let us read what is recorded in the Qur’an (chapter "the Cave", verse 86),
"When he reached the setting place of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring and found a people thereabout. We said: ‘O Dhul-Qarneyn! Either punish or show them kindness"’ (Surah 18:86).
There is a detailed response by brother Osama Abdallah regarding this verse:
Dhul Qarnayn's story. Sunrise and sunset. Also Why حمئة and not حاميةٍ. Dhil Qarnayn's journey is detailed with scientific and geographical maps that are more 1000 years old.
Lest I failed to understand what the Qur’an meant by these strange words, I referred to the famous students of the Qur’an as well as to the ancient scholars. I discovered that all of them concurred with this rendering and said that Muhammad’s friends inquired about the sunset and that he gave them that answer. All the scholars such as the Baydawi, Jalalan, and Zamakhshari confirm it. The Zamakhshari remarks in his book, "the Kash-shaf",
"Abu Dharr (one of Muhammad’s close companions) was with Muhammad during the sunset. Muhammad asked him: ‘Do you know, O Abu Dharr where this sets?’ He answered: ‘God and His apostle know better.’ Muhammad said: ‘It sets in a spring of slimy water"’ (3rd Edition, Volume 2 p. 743,1987).
1. This isn't a Sahih (Authentic) Hadith because I couldn’t find it in any of the Sahihs (I.e. Sahih Muslim, Sahih Al-Bukhari, Malik’s Muwwata, or Sunan Abu Dawud) I couldn’t find ANY Hadith AT ALL where it is said: "The sun sets in slimy water/ muddy water/ etc".
2. A-I.com quotes from a man that belonged to a sect that was (And still is) unacceptable by the majority of Muslims, the name of this sect is; the "Mu'tazili"s
3. This very same man (I.e. Zamakhshari) was criticized by the Sunni's for the inclusion of Mu'tazilite philosophical views.
4. The very same sect only accepts Mutawir reports, so according to the very same sect, this hadith is not enough proof:
"Abd al-Jabbar commented on the issue of reports saying (Martin et al., 1997): Mu'tazilis declare as true all that is established by mutawatir reports, by which we know what the Messenger of God has said. And that which was narrated by one or two transmitters only, or by one for whom error was possible, such reports are unacceptable in religions (al-diyanat) but they are acceptable in the proceedings of positive law (furu` l-fiqh), as long as the narrator is trustworthy, competent, just, and he has not contradicted what is narrated in the Qur'an.
Thus, the non-mutawatir reports are
accepted by Mu'tazilis, according to 'Abd al-Jabbar, when it comes to the
details or branches of law. When it comes to basic tenets, these reports are
not considered authentic enough to establish a belief central to the Islamic
faith. That is, the Mu'tazilis main issue is with reports of speculative authenticity
that have a theological, rather than legal, content, when these seem to
contravene the definitives of the Qur'an and rational proof. Since the
doctrines that Mu'tazilis hated most were anthropomorphism and unqualified
predestination (Ess, 2006), it were reports supporting these and resisting all
hermeneutical attempts at harmonizing and reconciliation that were criticized
and rejected by Mu'tazilis."
5. I could care less what this sect accepts or not, this hadith is not Sahih, therefore it is not enough proof to debunk Islam!
6. The very same so called hadith goes against the Qur'an when the Qur'an declares that the sun IS IN A CONSTANT ORBIT:
(Qur'an 14:33). "And He hath made subject to you the sun and the moon, both CONSTANTLY pursuing their courses..."
The sun doesn’t stop, it’s constantly in a orbit in our universe!!
As for where the sun sets
In his book, "The Lights of Revelation" (p. 399), the Baydawi indicates,
"The sun sets in a slimy spring; that is, a well which contains mud. Some of the readers of the Qur’an read it, ‘...a hot spring’, thus the spring combines the two descriptions. It was said that Ibn ’Abbas found Mu’awiya reading it (as) hot. He told him, ‘It is muddy.’ Mu’awiya sent to Ka’b al-Ahbar and asked him, ‘Where does the sun set?’ He said in water and mud and there were some people. So he agreed with the statement of ibn al-’Abbas. And there was a man who composed a few verses of poetry about the setting of the sun in the slimy spring."
It is very funny indeed that he quoted Ibn Abbas (radi Allahu Anhu), because the very same companion of Muhammed (Peace be upon him) said that the sun never actually sets, but rather it is in a constant orbit:
When we look at a more famous tafsir by Ibn Kathir we see Ibn Abbas & Ibn Masuud (raa) saying:
Ibn Kathirs tafsir, Chapter called:
"Among the Signs of the Might and Power of Allah are the Night and Day, and the Sun and Moon"
"...This was narrated from `Abdullah bin `Amr, may Allah be pleased with him. Ibn Mas`ud and Ibn `Abbas, may Allah be pleased with them, recited this Ayah as: (??????????? ??????? ?????????????? ?????) (And the sun runs with no fixed course for a term,) meaning that it has no destination and it does not settle in one place, rather it keeps moving night and day, never slowing down or stopping, as in the Ayah:
He has made the sun and the moon, both constantly
pursuing their courses, to be of service to you) (14:33). which
means, they will never slow down or stop, until the Day of
The very same Ibn Abbas (ra) Answering-Islam quoted is saying that the sun never actually sets (I.e. what we see is not what we get J)
Ibn Abbas from an authentic Tafsir: "..meaning that it has no destination and it does not settle in one place rather it keeps moving night and day, never slowing down or stopping"
Ibn Abbas from Answering-Islams source: "He said in water and mud and there were some people. So he agreed with the statement of ibn al-’Abbas"
I don’t know about you, but I think something is fishy with A-i.com’s sources!
Dear readers, know that there are many tafsirs out there (Literally hundreds of them), and almost half of all them use weak hadiths and their own opinions.
The Jalalan (p. 251) says that the setting of the sun is in a well which contains a murky mud. We found the same interpretation and text in the Tabari’s commentaries (p. 339) as well as in "Concise Interpretation of the Tabari" (p. 19 of part 2) in which he remarks that the well in which the sun sets "contains lime and murky mud".
These are the comments of the pillars of Islam and the intimate companions of Muhammad such as ibn Abbas and Aba Dharr. Also it is obvious from the Qur’an (chapter 36:38) that the sun ran then settled down. The verse says:
"And the sun runs on into a resting place."
1: Answering-Islam fails to realize that thoughts, opinions & guesses regarding scientific verses are NOT valid proof against Islam, if I say
that the Qur'an supports The Big Bang
theory, I can’t say that it’s obligatory to believe in this, and neither
can these scholars, and nor did they claim that! They were only guessing and
giving their opinions without valid proof!
2: As for Ibn Abbas and Abu dharr (raa), I have already shown you VALID & AUTHENTIC proof in Ibn Kathirs tafsir of what Ibn Abbas said! As for Abu Dharr, I would like to see Answering-Islam quoting a SAHIH hadith from Abu Dharr where he states that the sun sets in water!
Secondly, even if you find billions of
such opinions by the companions, this CAN’T disprove Islam because it’s only
mere opinions and guesses!
3: Answering-Islam said; "Also it is obvious from the Qur’an (chapter 36:38) that the sun ran then settled down. The verse says: "And the sun runs on into a resting place." "
My small response to this would be, no it’s not obvious because this is referring to when the sun stops I.e. On The Judgementday, and we already know that the sun doesn’t stop according to the verse I quoted, rather it moves constantly!
4. Jalalayn commented on (Link: chapter
36:38) that the sun doesn’t enter a hole in the water, it (the sun) is much
bigger then this earth, rather it was the prophet that saw a vision and not
Allah claiming it.
5. Lets see what Ibn Abbas (ra) Muhammeds companion commented on 36:38:
(And the sun runneth on unto a resting place for him) to the sun's mansion; it is also said that this means: it runs in the day and at night without any resting place. (That is the measuring of the Mighty) that is the providence of the Mighty in retribution against those who disbelieve in Him, (the Wise) He knows His creation and their providence.
It seems as if only Answering-Islam interprets this verse in the way he does… J
5. Let’s examine what Ibn Kathir said regarding the sun setting in a mud/water etc:
Ibn Kathirs Tafsir Ch: "His traveling and reaching the Place where the Sun sets (the West)"
“(Until, when he reached the setting place of the sun,) means, he followed a route until he reached the furthest point that could be reached in the direction of the sun's setting, which is the west of the earth. As for the idea of his reaching the place in the sky where the sun sets, this is something impossible, and the tales told by storytellers that he traveled so far to the west that the sun set behind him are not true at all. Most of these stories come from the myths of the People of the Book (CHRISTIANS AND JEWS) and the fabrications and lies of their heretics.
(he found it setting in a
spring of Hami'ah) meaning, he saw the sun as if it were
setting in the ocean. This is something
which everyone who goes to the coast can see: it
looks as if the sun is setting into the sea but in fact it never leaves its
path in which it is fixed.
End quote of Ibn Kathirs Tafsir!
I hope Answering Islam realizes how easy it is to quote a scholar and then proclaim "Look, Look, here is proof of what Islam teaches"
The Christians and Jews were trying to give Islam an error regarding this verse in the past, as well as today! Well, I say as Ibn Kathir said, it’s only lies by their HERETICS!
On page 585, the Baydawi says,
"The sun runs in its course to a certain extent then it stops. It is similar to the passenger’s repose after he completes his journey" (refer also the book of al-Itqan by the Suyuti, p. 242).
This is the story of the setting of the sun in the well and its course as a passenger!
You see folks? He uses OPINIONS of OLD scholars to debunk Islam!!
This opinion goes against the Qur'an, as proven by Ibn Abbas & Ibn Masuud (raa) :
(Qur'an 4:33). "And He hath made subject to you the sun and the moon, both CONSTANTLY pursuing their courses..."
So if the sun is in constant motion, and there is another verse saying that the sun RUNS to its resting place (Without giving time limit), then this means that the sun WILL stop in the future… and this is proven by modern science!!!!
I more say ey?
Answering-Islam.com is only relying on different people's interpretation of the Qur'an (Tafsirs).
Relying on tafsirs written hundreds of years ago when evaluating the Qur'an from a scientific point of view is dangerous because any scientific statement made within these works are sure to based on scientific knowledge at that time. Criticizing tafsirs, scholars, companions etc doesn't prove a thing, except to prove that people are fallible and cannot always be correct, no matter how learned we may become.
If I find something in Tafsir Al Jalalayn such as: "its setting in a spring is [described as seen] from the perspective of the eye, for otherwise it is far larger [in size] than this world; and he found by it, that is, [by] the spring, a folk,..."
Is it OK for me to say "LOOK, Islam teaches that the sun is bigger then our earth, it’s a MIRACLE!!!"? Is Islam really teaching this or is this only a mere opinion by Jalalayn?
Off course, it's only an opinion,
similarly the quotes Answering-Islam provides doesn’t prove a thing, nada,
nollo, Zero, Null!
The Phenomena of Thunder and Lightning
It is common knowledge, as scientists teach, that thunder is a sound caused by the impact between electrical charges found in the clouds. Yet Muhammad, the prophet of Muslims, has a different opinion in this matter. He claims that the thunder and the lightning are two of God’s angels—exactly like Gabriel!
In the Qur’an there is a chapter under the title of "Thunder" in which it is recorded that the thunder praises God. We might think that it does not mean that literally because thunder is not a living being—although, spiritually speaking, all of nature glorifies God. The expounders of the Qur’an and its chief scholars, however, insist that Muhammad said that the thunder is an angel exactly like the angel Gabriel. In his commentary (p. 329), the Baydawi comments on verse 13 of chapter of the Thunder,
"Ibn ’Abbas asked the apostle of God about the thunder. He told him, ‘It is an angel who is in charge of the cloud, who (carries) with him swindles of fire by which he drives the clouds."’
In the commentary of the Jalalan (p. 206), we read about this verse:
"The thunder is an angel in charge of the clouds to drive them."
Not only ibn ’Abbas asked Muhammad about the essence of the thunder, but the Jews did too. In the book, "al-Itqan" by Suyuti (part 4, p. 230), we read the following dialogue:
"On the authority of Ibn ’Abbas, he said the Jews came to the prophet (peace be upon him) and said, ‘Tell us about the thunder. What is it?’ He told them:
‘It is one of God’s angels in charge of the clouds. He carries in his hand a swindle of fire by which he pricks the clouds to drive them to where God has ordered them.’ They said to him, ‘What is this sound that we hear?’ He said: ‘(It is) his voice (The angel’s voice)."’
The same incident—the question of the Jews and Muhammad’s answer are mentioned by most scholars. Refer, for instance, to al-Sahih al-Musnad Min Asbab Nuzul al-Ayat (stories related to the verses of Qur’an, p. 11) and al-Kash-shaf by the Imam al-Kamakhshari (part 2, pp. 518, 519). He reiterates the same story and the same words of Muhammad. Thus, the incident is in vogue among all Muslim scholars, and the story and the dialogue between Muhammad and the Jews is well-known.
We have mentioned what the Baydawi, Jalalan, Zamakhshari, Suyuti, and ibn ’Abbas have said. We do not know (among the ancient scholars) any who are more famous than these. Concerning lighting, Muhammad affirms that it is an angel like the thunder and like Gabriel and Michael. On page 230 of the above references, Suyuti alludes to it. Also on page 68 of part 4 of the "Itqan", the Suyuti records for us the names of the angels, which are: "Gabriel, Michael, Harut, Marut, the Thunder and the Lightning (He said) that the lightning has four faces."
The Suyuti listed all these under the sub-title, "The names of God’s Angels". He also indicated that Muhammad said that the lightning is the tail end of an angel whose name is Rafael (refer to part 4, p. 230 of the Itqan).
‘It is one of God’s angels in charge of the clouds. He carries in his hand a swindle of fire by which he pricks the clouds to drive them to where God has ordered them.’ They said to him, ‘What is this sound that we hear?’ He said: ‘(It is) his voice (The angel’s voice)."’
how canA-I.com disprove a thing that is unseen (Ghayb), this is like trying to disprove that Satan exits, that Satan whispers, that Angels exist etc..!
But I found an excellent response by our brother Sami Zaatari:
Tafsir Ibn Kathir writes on this verse:
(And Ar-Ra'd (thunder) glorifies and praises Him), is similar to His other statement,
[????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????????? ??????????](And there is not a thing but glorifies His praise.) [17:44] Imam Ahmad recorded that Ibrahim bin Sa`d said, "My father told me that he was sitting next to Hamid bin `Abdur Rahman in the Masjid. A man from the tribe of Ghifar passed and Hamid sent someone to him to please come to them. When he came, Hamid said to me, `My nephew! Make space for him between me and you, for he had accompanied Allah's Messenger.' When that man came, he sat between me and Hamid and Hamid said to him, `What was the Hadith that you narrated to me from the Messenger of Allah ' He said, `A man from Ghifar said that he heard the Prophet say, I
«????? ????? ????????? ?????????? ?????????? ???????? ?????????? ?????????? ???????? ????????»(Verily, Allah originates the clouds, and they speak in the most beautiful voice and laugh in the most beautiful manner.) It appears, and Allah has the best knowledge, that the cloud's voice is in reference to thunder and its laughter is the lightning. Musa bin `Ubaydah narrated that Sa`d bin Ibrahim said, "Allah sends the rain and indeed, none has a better smile than it, nor more comforting voice. Its smile is lightning and its voice is thunder.''
Supplicating to Allah upon hearing Ar-Ra`d (Thunder)
Imam Ahmad recorded that Salim bin `Abdullah narrated that his father said that the Messenger of Allah used to say upon hearing the thunder and thunderbolts,
«?????????? ??? ??????????? ??????????? ????? ??????????? ???????????? ?????????? ????? ?????»(O Allah! Do not kill us with Your anger, nor destroy us with Your torment, and save us before that.'' This Hadith was recorded by At-Tirmidhi, Al-Bukhari in his book Al-Adab Al-Mufrad, An-Nasa'i in `Amal Al-Yawm wal-Laylah, and Al-Hakim in Al-Mustadrak. When `Abdullah bin Az-Zubayr used to hear thunder, he would stop talking and would supplicate, "All praise is to He Whom Ar-Ra`d (thunder) glorifies and praises, and so do the angels because of His awe.'' He would then say, "This is a stern warning to the people of earth.'' Malik collected this Hadith in Al-Muwatta', and Al-Bukhari in Al-Adab Al-Mufrad. Imam Ahmad recorded that Abu Hurayrah said that the Messenger of Allah said,
«????? ????????? ????? ???????: ???? ????? ???????? ??????????? ???????????????? ????????? ???????????? ???????????? ?????????? ????????? ????????????? ??????? ?????????????? ?????? ????????»(Your Lord, the Exalted and Most High, said, `Had My servants obeyed Me, I would have given them rain by night and the sun by day, and would not have made them hear the sound of the Ra`d (thunder).') Allah's statement,
[?????????? ??????????? ????????? ????? ??? ???????](He sends the thunderbolts, and therewith He strikes whom He wills,) indicates that He sends thunderbolts as punishment upon whom He wills, and this is why thunderbolts increase as time comes to an end. Al-Hafiz Abu Al-Qasim At-Tabarani narrated that Ibn `Abbas said that Arbad bin Qays bin Juzu' bin Julayd bin Ja`far bin Kulab, and `Amir bin At-Tufayl bin Malik came to Al-Madinah to the Messenger of Allah and sat where he was sitting. `Amir bin At-Tufayl said, "O Muhammad! What will you give me if I embrace Islam'' The Messenger of Allah said,
As you can see, Ibn Kathir said nothing about ar-rad being an angel, nor does the Quranic text imply anything about an angel, the Quranic text clearly says that the thunder praises Allah, ar-rad praises Allah, the Surah title is also called ar-rad meaning thunder, it is not called the angel of thunder, nor does the verse say the angel of thunder neither. It is most likely that these two tafsirs refered to ar-rad as an angel because the archangel Michael is the angel who under the command of God brings thunder and lightening to earth. However so it the more correct view is that ar-rad in the verse is referring to thunder, not an angel, nor the archangel Michael.
The late Christian writer and apologist ‘Abdallah ‘Abd al-Fadi quotes another renowned commentator named al-Baidawi and from hadith compiler al-Tirmidhi:
Al Baidawi said, "Ibn ‘Abbas reported that the Prophet was asked about the thunder. He answered, ‘It is an angel entrusted with the clouds. He has entwined shreds of fire with which he drives the clouds and the angels, in awe of God.’ Another opinion says that the pronoun him refers to the thunder itself."
Al-Tirmidhi brought out, quoting Ibn ‘Abbas, that "the Jews came to Muhammad and said, ‘Tell us about the thunder. What is it?’ He said, ‘One of the angels who is entrusted with the clouds. He has entwined shreds of fire with which he drives the clouds wherever God wills.’ They asked, ‘What is this sound, then, which is heard?’ He said, ‘It is his rebuke to the clouds, that they should stop where they have been commanded.’ They said, ‘You have spoken the truth!’" (Abd al-Fadi, Is the Qur’an Infallible? [Light of Life, P.O. Box 13, A-9503 Villach, Austria], p. 27)
The prophet here did not explicitly mean that thunder is an angel, he meant that thunder is brought by the angel, by God's command. The Jews asked the prophet what is thunder, he said it is one of the angels entrusted with the cloud, in other words the thunder is brought by the angels, such as the arch-angel Michael who brings down thunder and lightening.
The problem with the above claims is that thunder "is the sound of the shockwave caused when lightning instantly heats the air around it to up to 30 000 °C (54 000 °F). That super-heated air expands rapidly, then contracts as it cools. The rapid expansion/contraction generates sound waves, making the sound that is called ‘thunder.’" (Source: Wikipedia <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunder>) In particular, thunder is merely a side effect of lightning, not an independent agent.
Yes, and this is caused by the angel, again the prophet did not explicitly mean that the thunder is an angel, rather the thunder is brought by an angel, the angel entrusted with the clouds, the angel who brings lighting and thunder, i.e. the arch-angel Michael.
Moreover, no physicist or meteorologist would support the claim that thunder is driving the clouds. It is the wind that does so, and wind is caused by temperature and pressure differences (see Wikipedia <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind>). Thunder can neither make a cloud move in any significant way nor can it stop one.
Thunder is not an angel, it is an angel that causes the lighting and thunder, and this angel is entrusted with the cloud, it is this angel that is driving the clouds. To make things simple, we put it in point form:
1- God has an angel
2- God gives a task to this angel
3- This angel is entrusted with the clouds
4- The angel brings lighting and thunder
5- The angel drives the clouds
That is all. No scientific errors here.
End of Sami Zaatari’s rebuttal
Continuing with my response:
But the funniest thing about this objection of yours (Answering-Islam) is that your very own Bible says that Thunder is Gods voice:
"Hear attentively the thunder of His voice,And the rumbling that comes from His mouth."
Psalm 77:18 "...the lightning’s lightened the world: the earth trembled and shook."
According to these verses, Gods voice is thunder, and it trembles and shakes the earth!
"After it a voice roars;He thunders with His majestic voice, And He does not restrain them when His voice is heard."
"God thunders marvelously with His voice;He does great things which we cannot comprehend"
Have you an arm like God?Or can you thunder with a voice like His?
Some people even called themselves “Sons of thunder”:
James the son of Zebedee and John the brother of James, to whom He gave the name Boanerges, that is, “Sons of Thunder”;
And even more funnier, YOUR BIBLE AGREES that Angels send the censer down to earth, causing thunder, lightning:
Revelation 8:5 "..the angel took the censer, and filled it with fire of the altar, and cast it into the earth: and there were voices, and thunderings, and lightnings, and an earthquake.
God sending thunder is an error according to A-i.com:
1 Samuel 2:10
The adversaries of the LORD shall be broken in pieces;From heaven He will thunder against them. The LORD will judge the ends of the earth. “He will give strength to His king, And exalt the horn of His anointed.”
Is this verse also an error? Islam states that an angel guides the thunder, but his Bible claims that GOD sends thunders from Heaven (Probably universe). I am not saying that this Biblical verse is an error, but Answering-Islam is!
(I.e. He said that it’s an error because,
according to him “Mother nature” does all the work, and angels guiding the
thunder/clouds is an error)
2 Samuel 22:14
“The LORD thundered from heaven,And the Most High uttered His voice.
Answering-Islam claims to understand the thunder, and how it works, while his Bible says "Who can understand the spreading of clouds, the thunder from his CANOPY":
Indeed, can anyone understand the spreading of clouds,The thunder from His canopy?
Indeed these are the mere edges of His ways,And how small a whisper we hear of Him! But the thunder of His power who can understand?”
Some scientist are even unsure about this issue:
According to the University Corporation for Atmopsheric Research's FAQ on Thunder and Lightning, it seems that even the scientists are unsure (emphasis added):
"Why does lightning enhance the global electric field instead of dispelling it?
The answer lies in the structure of thunderstorms. For reasons unclear --but probably involving millions of collisions among ice crystals and small hailstones or graupel--storms evolve with positive charge near the top and negative charge from middle to cloud base.
How does charge get separated inside a thunderstorm to create lightning?
Clouds vary greatly in their ability to become electrified and produce lightning, and the process of charge separation still puzzles scientists.
What are the different kinds of lightning flashes?
Once enough charge has been separated in a growing storm, a lightning flash can occur. These normally travel within or between clouds (abbreviated CC) or from cloud to ground (CG). Most storms produce more CC than CG flashes--about six times as many in tropical storms and two times as many in midlatitudes. Sometimes a flash will travel from cloud to air or simply occur within "clear" air.
Exactly what triggers flashes is still uncertain and an area of continued research. It seems that very concentrated electric fields (perhaps at the ends of pointed surfaces or single particles) are needed to accelerate charged particles, or ions. Once moving with sufficient energy, the ions appear to blaze a path toward opposite charge in cascading fashion."
And UCAR aren't the only ones. In an article written for The Tucson Weekly, Gregory McNamee describes the thunder process (for want of a better phrase) thus (emphasis added):
As it fills with water, it grows: cumulus cloud becomes cumulus congestus, then cumulonimbus, the towering anvil-head formation that marks a midsummer's skyscape in Tucson.
Strange things are happening within that mixture of rising air and moisture. At the top of the cloud, 30,000 feet in the air, the temperature is 60 degrees below zero. There ice crystals, carrying a positive electrical charge, float and collide. At the much warmer bottom, particles of water, also positively charged, swirl about. Somewhere in the middle lies a zone, at about 10 degrees Fahrenheit, made up of "graupel," ice crystals coated with water and hail that rise and fall with the air currents.
For reasons that atmospheric scientists do not quite understand but are avidly pondering, this graupel has acquired a negative electrical charge somewhere along the way. As it does so, and when, as UA atmospheric-science researcher Martin Murphy says, "other special conditions are met," the action begins. Those "special conditions" include the presence of at least a cubic kilometer of graupel or hail in the cumulonimbus cloud's 10-degree band--enough to cover the University of Arizona campus more than half a mile deep.
Let’s take a look at what Tafsir Jalalayn
"And the thunder — this is an angel, who is in charge of the clouds, driving them, [while he] constantly, proclaims His praise, that is, he says, ‘Glory be to God through His praise’ (subhana’Llah wa-bi-hamdihi), and so too the angels, proclaim His praise, in awe of Him, that is, of God. He unleashes the thunderbolts — these are a fire which issues forth from the clouds — and smites with them whom He will, such that it burns [that person]: this was revealed regarding a man to whom the Prophet (s) had sent someone to invite [to Islam] and who said, ‘Who is the Messenger of God? And what is God? Is He [made] of gold, or of silver, or of copper?’, whereupon a thunderbolt came down on him and blew off the top of his head; yet they, that is, the disbelievers, dispute, argue with the Prophet (s), about God, though He is great in might, in power, or in [the severity of His] retribution."
How can Answering-Islam refute this when this is of the unseen? What is the scientific problem here?
I am aware that there may be scientific explanations of how the thunder works, but how does this disprove that an angel isn’t the guide of the clouds and thunders?? It is (Ghayb) something from the unseen!
They may object “The WINDS cause the…” and “The clouds cause…” as if we Muslims didn’t know this, but the point to note here is; HOW can A-I disprove that there isn’t an angel driving the winds and clouds and causing thunder with the help of nature?
Until recently, ALL Christians thought
that Satan is causing Natural disasters such as “Tornados”.
Even his Bible agrees with the quotes he provided:
Therefore the people who stood by and heard it said that it had thundered. Others said, “An angel has spoken to Him.”
And I heard, as it were, the voice of a great multitude, as the sound of many waters and as the sound of mighty thunderings, saying, “Alleluia! For the Lord God Omnipotent reigns!
Is this an error? NO absolutely NOT, but
according to A-I.com this is a CLEAR cut error.
Several thousand years ago, the Holy Bible clearly recorded that the earth is round and that it is hung on nothing.
"It is He who sits above the circle of the earth" (Isa. 40:22).
"He stretches out the north over empty space; He hangs the earth on nothing" (Job 26:7).
I would like to challenge you to disprove this:
1 Samuel 2:8 "The pillars of the earth are the LORD's, and he hath set the world upon them.
"He stretches out the north over empty space; He hangs the earth on nothing" (Job 26:7).
Let’s examine which statement is truer according to the Bible:
(1 Chronicles 16:30) "The earth ... shall be stable, that it be not moved."
This further proves that the earth is
established on pillars.
(Job 9:6) Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble.
Job 38:4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
Job 38:13 "That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it."
Does a sphere have ends, and can people fall of the earth?
(Psalms 18:15) “Then the channels of waters were seen, and the foundations of the world were discovered at thy rebuke, O LORD, at the blast of the breath of thy nostrils.”
There are several other verses speaking about a stable earth with pillars! The ones I have provided are enough to prove my point!
I Challenge you to clarify this!
Yet, the Qur’an challenges these established scientific facts. In many places, it alludes to the fact that the earth is flat and its mountains are like poles which create a balance so that the Earth does not tilt. Let us consider what the Qur’an says about the Earth:
In chapter 88:17,20, it is recorded,
"Will they not regard the camels how they are created...and the Earth how it is spread?"
In page 509, the Jalalan says,
"In his phrase, ‘how it is spread’, he denotes that the earth is flat. All the scholars of Islamic law agree upon this. It is not round as the physicists claim."
The Qur’anic teaching is obvious from the comment of Jalalan that "the earth is flat and not round as the scientists claim". What made Jalal al-Din say so is that the Qur’an hints in many chapters that the earth is flat(refer to 19:6, 79:30, 18:7, and 21:30). Also the Qur’an indicates that:
"We have placed in the earth firm hills lest it quake so as not to sway and hurt people" (21:31).
Scholars who agree upon the meaning of this verse believe as the Jalalan states (pp. 270-271),
"God has founded firm mountains on earth lest it shake people."
On page 429, al-Baydawi says,
"God has made firm mountains on earth lest it sway people and quake. He also made heaven as a ceiling and kept it from falling down!"
The Zamakhshari agrees with the above authors and reiterates the same words (refer to Zamakhshari part 3, p. 114).
In the Qur’an (chapter 50:7), we find another verse which carries the same meaning,
"And the earth have we spread out, and have flung firm hills therein" (Surah Qaf: 7).
This is accompanied by the same comment by the above Muslim scholars (refer to Jalalan, p. 437; Baydawi, p. 686, Tabari, p. 589, and Zamakhshari, part 4, p. 381). All of them assure us that "if it were not for these unshakable mountains, the earth would slip away."
Zamakhshari, the Baydawi and the Jalalan say: "God has built heaven without pillars but He placed unshakable mountains on Earth lest it tilts with people." Concerning chapter 50:7, the Suyuti says that scholars indicate that "Qaf is a mountain which encompasses the entire earth" (refer to Itqan, part 3, p. 29). Qaf is an Arabic L like K.
These are the comments of the ancient Muslim scholars word for word. Even some Saudi scholars wrote a book a few years ago to disprove the spherical aspect of the earth and they claimed that it is a myth, agreed with the above mentioned scholars, and said we must believe the Qur’an and reject the spherical aspect of the earth.
Unanimous consensus of ALL Muslim
earth is round!
Again Answering-Islam only relies on Islamic ancient scholars to disprove the Qur'an, well let’s see what some other medieval scholars said about the earth according to the Qur'an:
Ibn Taymiyah (d. 728 H / 1328 CE), may Allah be merciful with him, in his famous treatise, ar-Risalah al-'Arshiyah, refutes the position of the neo- Platonic philosophers who identified Allah's Throne with the ninth celestial sphere (Majmu'ul-Fatawa, Vol. 6, pp. 546-ff). In the course of his response, Ibn Taymiyah discusses the question of the earth is it round or flat? He writes:
"[That] celestial bodies are round (istidaaratul-aflaak) - as it is the statement of astronomers and mathematicians (ahlul-hay'ah wal-hisab) - it is [likewise] the statement of the scholars of the Muslims; as Abul-Hasan ibn al-Manaadi, Abu Muhammad ibn Hazm, Abul-Faraj ibn al-Jawzi and others have quoted: that the Muslim scholars are in agreement [that all celestial bodies are round]. Indeed Allah - taala - has said: And He (i.e., Allah) it is Who created the night and the day, the sun and the moon. They float, each in a falak (The Noble Quran, 21:33). Ibn Abbas says: A falaka like that of a spinning wheel."
Ibn Taymiyah continues: "The [word] falak [in the Arabic language] means that which is round. From which is the statement [of the Arabs]: 'The young girl's breasts have ta-fa-la-ka when they become round.'" (Vol. 6, pp. 566-567)
In an earlier passage (Vol. 6, pp. 565-566), Ibn Taymiyah discusses why those on the other side of the earth are not below us, just like we are not below them. He writes:
"As for the other side of the earth it is surrounded by water. [Note: Admittedly, Ibn Taymiyah - as all Muslim scholars of his day- were not aware of the Americas and believed that the Old World was encompassed by an ocean.] There are no human beings or anything like that [on that side]. Even if we were to imagine that people were on that side of the earth, such individuals would still be on the face of the earth. Those on that side of the earth are not below those who are on this side; just like those on this side are not below those on that side. For as all spherical bodies surround a center point (markaz), no one side of a spherical body is under the other, nor is the north pole under the south [Note: Unlike Western maps, Muslim cartographers (map-makers) would draw the world with the south-side up.] or vice versa.
In another passage (Vol. 5, p. 150) Ibn Taymiyah clearly states the earth is spherical.
"Significantly Abu Ya'la in his work Tabaqatal-Hanabilah (Biographical Entries of the Hanabali Scholars) quotes the unanimous consensus (ijma) of all Muslim scholars that the earth is round.
This consensus was mentioned by the scholars of the second generation (the students of the Prophet's Companions) and was based upon Ibn Abbas' explanation to 21:33 (previously cited) and other evidences.
The later belief of Muslim scholars, like as-Suyuti (died 911 AH / 1505 CE) that the earth is flat represents a deviation from this earlier opinion."
He also said: "Zamakhshari, the Baydawi and the Jalalan say: "God has built heaven without pillars but He placed unshakable mountains on Earth lest it tilts with people." Concerning chapter 50:7, the Suyuti says that scholars indicate that "Qaf is a mountain which encompasses the entire earth" (refer to Itqan, part 3, p. 29). Qaf is an Arabic L like K."
Actually the letter 'Qaf' does not occur in ayat 50:7, it appears on its own in ayat 50:1. Nor is it an Arabic L, it is normally written as Q. I note that with this, and indeed all of the references given in this article, not a single link is given for the reader to verify these facts for themselves. Even if they provide the links, SO WHAT? An error in one man's interpretation and it doesn't disprove the Qur'an one bit!
also want to respond to:
"Even some Saudi scholars wrote a book a few years ago to disprove the spherical aspect of the earth and they claimed that it is a myth, agreed with the above mentioned scholars, and said we must believe the Qur'an and reject the spherical aspect of the earth."
I found this on the net:
Apparently, Sheikh Abdel-Aziz Ibn Baaz, a scholar from Saudi Arabia said this. Needless to say:
· This 'fatwa' has been copied onto every single anti-Islamic page possible,
· Not a single link has been provided to the source, and
· I haven't found any independant proof that this was ever said by the Sheikh.
yet it seems that this hoax has fooled just about everyone who is desperate
enough to believe anything bad written about Islam.
What does the Qur'an actually say about the earth, apart from the ancient schollars knowledge about science?:
In 79:30, Allah says,
[Transliteration] Waal-arda baAAda thalika dahaha [79:30]
The key word in the above verse is “dahaha”. In Arabic, there is a phrase, “iza dahaha” which means “when he throws the stones over the ground to the hole”. The hole is called “Udhiyatun”. “Almadahi” signify round stones according to the size of which a hole is dug in the ground in which the stones are thrown in a game. “Almadahi” also signify a round thing made of lead by the throwing of which persons contend together. So there is a signification of ROUNDNESS in the root of the word “dahaha”. According to some etymologists, the word for the “egg of an ostrich” also has the same root as “dahaha”. They also take from this that the earth is of the shape of the egg of an ostrich. Latest science findings confirm that the earth is not exactly spherical but the earth is an ellipsoid, i.e. flattened by its poles,[ just like the shape of an egg of an ostrich].
The Arabic words for “flat” or “level” or “straight shaped” are “sawi” and “almustavi”. There is not a single place in Quran where there is any indication of the earth being “flat” or “straight shaped”. The word “faraash” in 2:22, 51:48; the word “wasia” in 4:97, 29:56, 30:10; the word “mahd” in 20:53, 43:10, 78:6; the word “basaat” in 71:19; the word “suttihat” in 88:20; and the word “tahaaha” in 91:6, all may mean, “to spread”, “to expand” or “to extend” with slight differences in their connotations but none signify the earth being straight-shaped or flat.
As for the seven earths A-I objected to, it is indeed a scientific fact, our earth got 7 layers (7 Ard's), the word "Ard" got 2 meanings, one is the entire earth, the other meaning is Land(s)
The 7 layers of earth and iron was sent down from space.
There is a hadith stating that a man will sink down the seven “Ards” on judgementday, and this proves that “Ards” here is referring to the 7 layers of out earth, how else can you SINK down the 7 “Ard”s?!
But I do NOT deny that there are 6 other earth’s in our space!
It is also well-known that the Qur’an proclaims that there are seven earths—not just one (refer to the commentary of the Jalalan, p. 476, al-Baydawi, p. 745 as they interpret chapter 61:12, Surah Divorce: 1 2).
It is very clear that the sun does not traverse the heaven and set down in a murky, muddy well, or slimy water, or a place which contains both of them as the Baydawi, Zamakhshari, and the Qur’an remark.
Nor is the earth flat and the mountains the pillars and the towerings which prevent the earth from moving as the Qur’an and the scholars said. Nor is there a mountain which encompasses the whole earth—nor are there seven earths.
Neither is the lightning an angel whose name is Rafael, nor is the thunder an angel. It never happened that the angel Gabriel inspired Muhammad to write a complete chapter about his friend the angel thunder! The thunder and lightning are natural phenomena and not God’s angels like Michael and Gabriel as the prophet of Islam claims.
My response &
Indeed you are a blasphemer, your Bible teaches all these things and you call it errors, and I have refuted all of your objections against the holy wonderful amazing Qur'an (Or more likely; your objections against some early schollars :-) )!
May Allah bless our prophet and send peace upon him, may he guide us all, and make our knowledge increase! Ameen
The Overwhelming Scientific Miracles in the Noble Quran section.
Abortion in Islam is a crime after the first 120 days!
Rebuttals, and exposing the lies of the Answering Islam team section.
Rebuttals by Mahir.
Islam and the Noble Quran - Questions and Answers.
Contradictions and History of Corruption in the Bible.
Questions about Jesus that trinitarian Christians don't have logical answers for.
What parts of the Bible do Muslims believe are closest to the Truth? and Why?
"Allah" was GOD Almighty's original Name in the Bible according to the Hebrew and Aramaic sources.
Scientific Miracles in Islam and the Noble Quran.
Most of the Bible's books and gospels were written by mysterious people!
Jesus mentioned Muhammad by the name in the Bible.
Did Isaiah 53 really prophesies about the crucifixion of Jesus? It supports Islam's claims about Jesus peace be upon him never died on the cross. I also addressed John 19:36-37 from the Bible and proved that Jesus never got crucified, since GOD Almighty promised that he will protect Jesus' body and not let even a single bone be broken. My question to all Christians is: How in the world is it possible for the feet to get nailed on the cross without any penetration to the bones by the nails, hence breaking part of the feet's bones?! I also added refutations to Exodus 12:46, Numbers 9:12, Zechariah 12:10 and Psalm 34:20, which supposedly prove the Christians' belief about Jesus crucifixion. I proved that this dogma has no truth what so ever and exposed the wrong Trinitarian English translation of Zechariah 12:10.
Send your comments.
Back to Main Page.