Quran and a Universe from Smoke: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
[checked revision][checked revision]
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 83: Line 83:
The Arabic word for "gas" is ''gaz'' or ''ghaz'' (غاز), not ''dukhan''. It is this word which should have been used to describe the state of the universe if the above verse were correct.
The Arabic word for "gas" is ''gaz'' or ''ghaz'' (غاز), not ''dukhan''. It is this word which should have been used to describe the state of the universe if the above verse were correct.
===Support from Scientists===
===Support from Scientists===
The final piece of evidence is the claim that a renowned geologist supports the view that the information in the Qur'an could not have been of human origin:{{quote||Dr. Alfred Kroner is one of the world’s renowned geologists. He is Professor of Geology and the Chairman of the Department of Geology at the Institute of Geosciences, Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.  He said: “Thinking where Muhammad came from . . . I think it is almost impossible that he could have known about things like the common origin of the universe, because scientists have only found out within the last few years, with very complicated and advanced technological methods, that this is the case.”  Also he said: “Somebody who did not know something about nuclear physics fourteen hundred years ago could not, I think, be in a position to find out from his own mind, for instance, that the earth and the heavens had the same origin.”}}While Dr. Alfred Kroner was a geology professor in [[Germany]], he never endorsed the Qur'an as being an accurate source of scientific information. A video interview conducted with Kroner in 2011 confirms that his comments from the 80s were taken out of context.<ref>{{cite web|url= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClHuG880pqU|title= Alfred Kröner - Quote mined scientist denounces Quran miracle claims|publisher= YouTube (video)|author= TheRationalizer|date= March 21, 2011|archiveurl= |deadurl=no}}</ref> He currently does not endorse the Qur'anic view of creation nor did he at the time of the original interview. He affirms that parts of the Qur'an are not supported by modern scientific evidence and are completely unscientific and mythical.
The final piece of evidence is the claim that a renowned geologist supports the view that the information in the Qur'an could not have been of human origin:{{quote||Dr. Alfred Kroner is one of the world’s renowned geologists. He is Professor of Geology and the Chairman of the Department of Geology at the Institute of Geosciences, Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.  He said: “Thinking where Muhammad came from . . . I think it is almost impossible that he could have known about things like the common origin of the universe, because scientists have only found out within the last few years, with very complicated and advanced technological methods, that this is the case.”  Also he said: “Somebody who did not know something about nuclear physics fourteen hundred years ago could not, I think, be in a position to find out from his own mind, for instance, that the earth and the heavens had the same origin.”}}While Dr. Alfred Kroner was a geology professor in Germany, he never endorsed the Qur'an as being an accurate source of scientific information. A video interview conducted with Kroner in 2011 confirms that his comments from the 80s were taken out of context.<ref>{{cite web|url= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClHuG880pqU|title= Alfred Kröner - Quote mined scientist denounces Quran miracle claims|publisher= YouTube (video)|author= TheRationalizer|date= March 21, 2011|archiveurl= |deadurl=no}}</ref> He currently does not endorse the Qur'anic view of creation nor did he at the time of the original interview. He affirms that parts of the Qur'an are not supported by modern scientific evidence and are completely unscientific and mythical.
==Conclusion==
==Conclusion==
The entire argument rests on the Qur'anic description of the "heavens" as "smoke"; a claim which in-turn rests on a false equivalence made between smoke and the makeup of the early universe. It also presupposes that the Qur'anic author must describe something as complex as the earliest phase of the universe using only a single word. A presupposition that makes little sense and is far from convincing when you consider how such information could have validated the authenticity of the Qur'anic message.
The entire argument rests on the Qur'anic description of the "heavens" as "smoke"; a claim which in-turn rests on a false equivalence made between smoke and the makeup of the early universe. It also presupposes that the Qur'anic author must describe something as complex as the earliest phase of the universe using only a single word. A presupposition that makes little sense and is far from convincing when you consider how such information could have validated the authenticity of the Qur'anic message.
Editors, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers
6,632

edits