Are you an atheist? (21 Viewers)

Are you an atheist?


  • Total voters
    351
The point is that if you take all the verses regarding creation with provable science and they match, you can’t say that. With 1 or 2 verses, you could. knowledge of science among the Arabs 14 centuries ago was very limited. To randomly pick and choose the correct science and get them all right, is a S T R E T C H.

It would be remarkable if it were true but it simply isn't so. You perceive them as matching on the slightest resemblance because you are programmed to accept that the Qur'an is infallible and cannot contemplate any other possibility.

For example, where does science concur with the Quran regarding the seven heavens above and the seven Earths below?

"Allah raised up the heavens and supported them". This shows very much a concept of the universe based on Earth as the foundation and no working concept of gravity. Even so far as a flat Earth mentality.

According to Qur'an, the Earth is pegged down with mountains. The reality is quite the opposite. The mountains are pushing up from under the surface.

Qur'an wrong, game over.
 
It would be remarkable if it were true but it simply isn't so. You perceive them as matching on the slightest resemblance because you are programmed to accept that the Qur'an is infallible and cannot contemplate any other possibility.
The resemblance is much more than slight especially when all the verses are taken together. I can’t imagine anyone sitting in the middle of the desert and happening to get all the correct facts of creation enter the Qur’an but missing all the wrong stuff.

The number seven in the Qur’an is a symbolic way of saying ‘many’. Over the past couple of decades we have discovered many Earth like planets.

55:7 And the heaven He raised and imposed the balance.

It depends on what the ‘balance’ means here.

Mountains rest on immense strata that may be ten to fifteen times as deep as the portion remaining on the surface of the earth. There also exist mountains rising from the bottom of seas that also possess substratum. These substrata support the visible portion of the mountains in accordance with the Archimedean principle. These substrata were unknown until a few centuries back, let alone during the time of the Prophet. The simile in the Quran is once again a miraculous statement. A simple internet search would have told you this, which is what I did.

Qur'an will always be right. God is Great.

3:56 And as for those who disbelieved, I will punish them with a severe punishment in this world and the Hereafter, and they will have no helpers.”
3:57 But as for those who believed and did righteous deeds, He will give them in full their rewards, and God does not like the wrongdoers.
 
Galaxiom and I have attempted to show you that you are allowing your religious bias to color your viewpoint. I repeat this question, which is actually extensible to ANY Holy Book that makes testable claims that contradict the real world.

If the book was divinely inspired, don't you think the presumed originator of the inspiration would at least have gotten it right?

How would they know that the universe began from a tiny particle and rent asunder (21:30), etc. etc.
Various religions use a similar concept. It is no coincidence that the Qur'an echoes some earlier beliefs.

Regarding creation myths, look up any of these as very old cultures with the creation myth.

Cheonjiwang Bonpuri = Korean

Enûma Eliš = Babylonian

Ancient Greek started with the worlds as a uniform place of chaos

Kumulipo = Hawaiian (remember, before they were discovered, they were an isolated island nation way out in the middle of the Pacific)

Among the Mande people of Mali, they used a Seed concept.

Pangu = chinese, using the "cosmic egg" concept.

The Serer people of Senegal had a "mythical egg" concept.

The Tungusic people of Siberia had a "start from chaos" mythos though for them the world was all water, no land.

Unkulunkulu - from the Zulu people, which have a creator who created everything.

Väinämöinen, from the Finland Kaleval, is another "cosmic egg" origin.

Viracocha - is an Incan creator who started from nothing and created everything.

Ancient Egypt had a "creation from the void" mythos.

It is a bit harder to research the actual time in history at which various cultures knew that reproduction was based on sperm-and-egg. I'll have to say I'm working on that one.
 
Last edited:
We know from people like Alexander Friedmann, George Henri Lemaitre and Edwin Hubble to name a few that the universe began from a tiny particle (singularity) which blew apart. Do any of your previous civilisations say these two things in particular? I don't think I have ever heard that the people copied the creation story from of old.

Also just to throw this out there, although this has not been proven yet so time will tell, some scientists like Stephen Hawkings have said that the universe will eventually come to an end by collapsing (referred as the Big Crunch) and eventually becoming a singularity which will then re-explode, hence the occurrence of a new universe. Stephen Hawkings has also said that we are living through a series of big bangs or universes.

The Day when We will fold the heaven like the folding of a [written] sheet for the records. As We began the first creation, We will repeat it. [That is] a promise binding upon Us. Indeed, We will do it. 21:104

Also as I keep saying keep in mind that I am considering all the facts and my conclusion is to get all the science right and miss out the incorrect stuff is stretching coincidence tooooo far.
 
Last edited:
Here are some creation stories of old that weren’t selected and placed in the Qur’an. Comparing with is below, which I have obviously copied and pasted from a web site, shows there were no creation stories that match what actually happened and what is in Qur’an 21:30.

India

The creation myths of India, in keeping with the complexities of Hinduism, range from familiar themes such as dismembered giants and magical eggs to the most delicately expressed doubts as to the possibility of knowledge on such a matter.

In an early story Purusha is a primal man sacrificed by the gods as the act of creation. The sky comes from his head, the earth from his feet, the sun from his eye and the moon from his mind. The four castes of Hindu society also derive from his body - see the Caste system). The birds and animals come from the fat which drips from him during the sacrifice.

A much later Indian story involves the god Brahma. Beginning from nothing, he goes through a lengthy process. First he creates, by thought alone, the waters. In them he deposits his seed, which grows into a golden egg. He himself is born in the egg. After a year, again by thought alone, he splits the egg in two. The halves become, in the usual way, heaven and earth.

But Indian philosophy also produces a less literal response to these eternal mysteries. One of the hymns in the Rigveda speculates on various cosmic forces which might have fashioned the universe. It concludes with a passage of most Sophisticated scepticism, beginning: 'But, after all, who knows, and who can say whence it all came, and how creation happened.'

Greece

The Greeks acquire a vague attachment to a great many different gods during their gradual movement, as a group of Indo-European tribes, into the region of modern Greece. The result is an extremely complex account of how everything began, with deities jostling for a role. Zeus, ruler of the sky, eventually emerges as the chieftain of the gods. It is likely that he is the original god whom the Greeks brought with them. But in the first Greek account of the beginning of the universe, written down by Hesiod in about 800 BC, Zeus arrives late on the scene.

The story begins, like so many others, with a gaping emptiness, Chaos. Within this there emerges Gaea, the earth.

Gaea gives birth to a son, Uranus, who is the sky. The world now exists, earth and heaven, and together Gaea and Uranus provide it with a population, their children. First Gaea produces the Titans, heroic figures of both sexes, but her next offspring are less satisfactory; the Cyclops, with only one eye in the middle of their foreheads, are followed by unmistakable monsters with a profusion of heads and arms. Uranus, appalled by his offspring, shuts them all up in the depths of the earth.

Gaea's maternal instincts are offended. She persuades the youngest Titan, Cronus, to attack his father. He surprises him in his sleep and with a sharp sickle cuts off his genitals, which he throws into the sea.

Cronus frees his brothers and sisters from their dungeon, and together they continue to populate the world. But an inability to get on with their offspring characterizes the males of this clan. Cronus, who has six children with his sister Rhea, eats each of them as soon as it is born.

Once again maternal instincts intervene. To save her youngest child, Rhea wraps a stone in swaddling clothes. Cronus swallows the bundle and Rhea sends the baby to foster parents. He is Zeus. As an adult he overwhelms his father, defeats all the other Titans in a great war, and then settles upon Mount Olympus to preside over a world which has at last achieved a certain calm.

During this, imperceptibly, mankind has arrived on earth - it is not clear how. But men are certainly there, because a free-thinking Titan, Prometheus, smuggles them the valuable gift of fire. These first men are not considered direct ancestors by most Greeks, and there are several versions of how the present race of humans originated.

One is that Zeus, exasperated by Prometheus, sends a flood to drown mankind. Two humans escape in an ark. When the flood has subsided, the oracle at Delphi tells these two to cast behind them the bones of their first ancestor. That ancestor, they reason, is Gaea, the earth. They throw stones over their shoulders, and from each stone a human being is created.
 
All of your examples that you deny as being parallel to the Qur'an have the same basic concept - out of emptiness emerges order, by any means consistent with the belief of the storyteller. Whether it is created by fiat or by hatching a cosmic egg or by growing a cosmic seed or by exploding a speck of cosmic dust, they are all the same.

Starting from chaos, some anthropomorphized being creates the universe and the worlds in it and the stars and the animals and plants and ... you get the idea. All the same. And all attempting to make some man-like but divine being the instigator.

To MY mind, the commonality occurred because people didn't know about the quantum universe based on probability. They therefore couldn't understand that a quantum universe does not NEED strict causality for things to happen. Therefore, there is no NEED for a "first cause."

All ancient or modern religions (except Buddhism) require a causative agent. Buddhism is the except that recognizes a basic fact: Sometimes a question has no meaning because of its implications. So while the question can situationally have meaning, sometimes asking "Why" is without meaning. The trick is to know the difference.

To me, folks who use ANY VARIANT of "God works in mysterious ways" or "We are not meant to know the mind of Allah" or equivalent terms has merely placed an interposing figure in front of the REAL response - "We don't know why it happens either." All you do when you use that phrase is couch the answer in mysticism that still doesn't answer the question. And that is where we are with the answers provided by the Bible, the Qur'an, and pick your other favorite holy books.

We laugh at the primitive creation myths of ancient Greece, China, Korea, India, Babylon, the cultures native to North America and South America, and Africa. But somehow we have forgotten to laugh at the primitive creation myths from Islam or Christianity. And PLEASE let's not get started on Scientology. I just had lunch, and hysterical laughter makes me want to hurl.
 
Regarding the Bible I have always been fascinated as to how accurate it's description of the formation of the universe is. I mean the words "Let There Be Light" made even more impressive if you read the short story "The last Question" by Isaac Asimov http://multivax.com/last_question.html ... The accuracy describing the creatures of the sea crawling out onto the land, and many other things which point at more knowledge than you would expect people to have many thousands of years ago.

The Biblical creation myth has flowering plants appearing before the fish in the ocean. This is reverse to the sequence in the fossil record.
 
Asimov's "The Last Question" is a must-read for any programmer or science-fiction fan.
 
The number seven in the Qur’an is a symbolic way of saying ‘many’. Over the past couple of decades we have discovered many Earth like planets.

Nothing in science about many heavens above or Earths below.

Mountains rest on immense strata that may be ten to fifteen times as deep as the portion remaining on the surface of the earth. There also exist mountains rising from the bottom of seas that also possess substratum. These substrata support the visible portion of the mountains in accordance with the Archimedean principle. These substrata were unknown until a few centuries back, let alone during the time of the Prophet.

The Quran doesn't describe this even vaguely. It says the mountains peg the Earth down. It needs to be pegged down because it is "unrolled" like a map according to the Quran.

That unrolling is analogous to the scientific explanation only for those who are completely besotted by the Quran.
 
… or by exploding a speck of cosmic dust, they are all the same.

The_Doc_Man could you point out when and which civilisation said this. Just curious.

The Qur’an not only accurately tells us that the universe was created from a split particle, but also that the early universe was gaseous, the correct sequence of the cosmos, an expanding universe and how the universe will end. Would be interesting to see which ancient civilisation more than 14 centuries got all that right even, if I dare say so, on a slight resemblance. There are many scientific facts that people came up with many centuries which were just plain wrong. So why does the Qur’an not include these?

But somehow we have forgotten to laugh at the primitive creation myths from Islam or Christianity.

Can you expand?

The Old adage there's nothing new Under the Sun is so true when applied to Religious text, which are basically just a rehash of existing texts, stories, myths and legends.

Yes but among the mire of incorrect creation stories of which there were plenty and to ‘pick’ only the right stuff is pretty remarkable. The probability of what I have said in my opening para regarding the universe in this post to have all been correct and not one single fact being wrong is pretty awesome. Not only that to get the facts regarding geology, human reproduction, etc. etc. all correct, well you can see where I am going with this.

The creation story given in the book of Genesis is so full of holes, it’s difficult to know where to begin. The original Torah would of course made sense and been accurate.

It says the mountains peg the Earth down.

Really? Which verse does it say that?
 
Th The probability of what I have said in my opening para regarding the universe in this post to have all been correct and not one single fact being wrong is pretty awesome. Not only that to get the facts regarding geology, human reproduction, etc. etc. all correct,

Except, despite what you claim, the descriptions in the Qur'an are not accurate. Your delusion makes you presume they are. As usual you simply ignore what doesn't suit your religious prejudices.

well you can see where I am going with this.
Yes. Down the path the same old path of confirmation bias.
 
Except, despite what you claim, the descriptions in the Qur'an are not accurate. Your delusion makes you presume they are. As usual you simply ignore what doesn't suit your religious prejudices.

I could say the same of you i.e. you are not prepared to see the TRUTH when it is in front of you. This is not unique as people of old did exactly the same.

6:5 For they had denied the truth when it came to them, but there is going to reach them the news of what they used to ridicule.
50:5 But they denied the truth when it came to them, so they are in a confused condition.
50:12 The people of Noah denied before them, and the companions of the well and Thamud.
 
In the real world, truth is determined by facts, not by who says 'Because I say so' the loudest, and certainly not by books whose only claim to truth is that they declare that they are the truth.

"I'm right, I don't need to prove it, and you're blind if you don't see it" is never going to get you anywhere, man, especially against people who have quite obviously spent far more time studying theology and theological debate than you.
 
In the real world, truth is determined by facts ...

Exactly. That's what I have been doing. I don't have to shout, the facts in the Qur'an speak for itself.

As for those people who have spent more time studying theology than me, so what. Surely arriving at the TRUTH is more important even if you only spend a few hours than someone who spends a lifetime and is still in denial.
 
You are confusing facts with things written in the Qur'an.

If the Qur'an was actually the seat of all accumulated knowledge then you would be in a position to debate or inform us with some degree of correctness.
But as it was collated from a rag tag of passed down fables, hearsay, randomly interpreted opinion and the spin of who was writing it at the time, like every other religious text, unfortunately you don't have any where to stand in a reasoned intelligent debate.

In dozens of instances of a quoted text, there is almost always a contradictory quote that can be pulled from the same text. You may as well get those monkeys around those typewriters...
 
You are confusing facts with things written in the Qur'an.

I am using provable scientific facts as my foundation and then comparing what the Qur’an says on the same subject. I don’t see why that is not dealing with facts as you put it?

If the Qur'an was actually the seat of all accumulated knowledge then you would be in a position to debate or inform us with some degree of correctness.

The Qur’an has knowledge that God has deemed we need to know about.

31:27 And if whatever trees upon the earth were pens and the sea [was ink], replenished thereafter by seven [more] seas, the words of Allaah would not be exhausted. Indeed, Allaah is Exalted in Might and Wise.


But as it was collated from a rag tag of passed down fables, hearsay, randomly interpreted opinion and the spin of who was writing it at the time, like every other religious text, unfortunately you don't have any where to stand in a reasoned intelligent debate.

Clearly you have very little knowledge of the subject.

In dozens of instances of a quoted text, there is almost always a contradictory quote

Can you provide evidence of this?
 
Clearly you have very little knowledge of the subject.

I know that a man claimed to have been talked to for 23 years by an angel and that he recounted those conversations to a number of other people. They then wrote down what they could remember and that these stories then became the basis for a religious text.

This seems highly un-scientific to me - but each to there own.

I don't know the writings sufficiently well, but a quick google reveals many many contradictions in almost every religious text. Bible and Qur'an and probably others I can't be bothered to research.
 
The_Doc_Man could you point out when and which civilisation said this. Just curious.

The question was regarding civilizations that had a from-chaos mythos for the creation of the universe (or the world, since some didn't look farther than that). I gave you a list of civilizations with such myths. You could do a search from Wikipedia to get time frames. However, ancient Babylon predates Christianity and is certainly not younger than Judaism. They are on the list. For some of the African cultures, the age of that culture's myths is hard to determine since many of them are based on oral traditions. But then, until a culture learns how to write, ALL myths are passed down orally. So now we come to the tricky question: When did the oral traditions of Islam get codified? And how far back do they reach before codification?

Though I have done some serious reading, I cannot say I am enough of an expert in primitive anthropology to assign dates to any of those cultures. So I'm not sure of anything other than relative ages. Babylonian and Sumerian are the oldest of the Mediterranean cultures. The Korean and Chinese cultures go back pretty far, too!
 
To be fair, Islam itself dates from shortly after the warlord Muhammad's life, and scholars tend to agree he really did live from appx 570 CE to 6/8/632, and that he didn't begin preaching until around 610. We know that he migrated to and eventually took over Medina around 620, that he conquered Mecca in 630, and most of the Arabian peninsula before his death two years later.

His teachings, however? As with Christianity, they weren't actually written down and codified for some time, in this case until about 20 years after Muhammad's death. This was done partly because the people who had learned Muhammad's teachings were dying off themselves, and partly because, as always happens in an oral tradition, changes had crept in to the different versions.

Now, that said...

In dozens of instances of a quoted text, there is almost always a contradictory quote
Can you provide evidence of this?

While I don't care for this particular site overall (it's by Christian zealots for Christian zealots), here are 153 of them. (Disregard the section 'The Qu'ran in Contradiction to the Earlier Revelations', as it argues that those parts are false because they contradict the Bible, although I do find it amusing that each of you 'proves' the other false because your book says so.)
 
If someone today were to say that God was talking to them through an angel and had some new commandments, would you believe them?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom