Scientific Miracles in the Quran: Difference between revisions

This article or section is being renovated. Lead = 4 / 4 Structure = 2 / 4 Content = 2 / 4 Language = 1 / 4 References = 1 / 4 Lead 4 / 4 Structure 2 / 4 Content 2 / 4 Language 1 / 4 References 1 / 4

In recent times, many Muslim scholars have interpreted certain Quranic verses as being miraculously predictive of modern scientific discoveries and have presented these interpretations as evidence of the Quran's divine origin. Interestingly, no verse contained in the Quran has ever prompted a scientific discovery, and Modern Muslim scholars have also generally not tried to argue that this has ever been the case. As such, all the purported instances of miraculous scientific foreknowledge in the Quran have been identified as such only after the science they are alleged to describe has been discovered by independent and unrelated means. Critics have pointed out this weakness and generally hold these so-called scientific miracles to be the product of theological sophistry whereby science is read back into the Quran upon discovery. Critics also maintain that there is no instance in the Quran where a scientific subject has been described with sufficient clarity, specificity, and accuracy as to qualify as anything Miraculous.

In the eyes of historians, the Quran's author(s) almost certainly made no pretensions about predicting modern science. In support of this perspective, there is no Islamic scripture that actually claims that the Quran (or Islamic scripture in general) contain allusions to future scientific discoveries. Consequently, where the Quran makes mention of what are today perceived as topics of scientific interest (such as the wonders of the day and night sky, fauna and flora, or the human spirit), historians suggest that these passages were originally intended to simply inspire awe in their audience by orienting that audience's attention towards the world's many marvels and especially those marvels accessible to individuals living in the harsh, arid, and rocky environment of early 7th century Arabia.

The most popular Islamic voices who have argued for the existence of scientific miracles in the Quran in the West include Harun Yahya, Zakir Naik, I.A. Ibrahim, and Hamza Tzortzis. Notably, in 2013, Hamza Tzortzis published an essay withdrawing his case for scientific miracles in the Quran and stating that the entire endeavor to prove such miracles "has become an intellectual embarrassment for Muslim apologists" and "has exposed the lack of coherence in the way they have formulated" their arguments, noting that "many Muslims who converted to Islam due to the scientific miracles narrative, have left the religion".^[1] Zakir Naik has been banned in India, Bangladesh, Canada, the UK, and Malaysia under anti-terrorism and anti-hate laws.^[2][3][4][5] On January 11th, 2020, Harun Yahya was sentenced to 1,075 years in prison for, among other charges, operating a sex cult, sexual assault, black mail, and money laundering.^[6][7]

Methodology of Islamic theologians

A variety of theological methods are employed by modern Islamic scholars in making the case for any given scientific miracle in the Quran. These methods include what can be described and categorized as dehistoricization, pseudo-correlation, reinterpretation, disambiguation, elective literalism, elective esotericism, and data mining. While there exist any number of alternative approaches and combinations thereof to making the case for any given scientific miracle, the aforementioned methods are, in roughly descending order, the most common. These methods are not mutually exclusive and tend to employed in conjunction with one another in order to strengthen the case being made.

Methodology

While modern Islamic theologians have employed the various methods discussed here in order to develop cases of scientific miracles in the Quran, philosophical and/or religious justification for the employment of these methods has been scant if at all forthcoming. Critics who have pointed out the problems inherent in the use of some/all of these methods have generally not been responded to or taken seriously by establishment theologians.

Dehistoricization

The most common practice in making the case for a scientific miracle in the Quran is dehistoricization. Dehistoricization is the process whereby a historical event (in this case a verse of the Quran) is removed from its historical context. Since no Islamic scripture claims to be predictive of modern science, the great majority of scientific miracle cases require a degree of dehistoricization. Muhammad did not, after all, appeal directly to his companions by telling them he could forecast scientific discoveries that would be made more than a thousand years hence, in a future they would not live to see. Similarly, Muhammad did not appeal to his companions by forecasting historical events would be uncovered by future archeological research. If he had done either, the miracle would have been ineffective and gone over the heads of his contemporaries who would not have known what Muhammad was talking about. Indeed, if his contemporaries could have verified the scientific or historical remark made by Muhmmad, it would not have been a miracle (as this would mean that Muhammad could also have learned of the fact through similar means).

As a result, verses have to be dehistoricized and subsequently reframed as forecasts of future scientific (or archeological) discoveries. For instance, when the Quran states the Earth has been 'spread out' as a 'bed' and that mountains have been cast down upon the Earth as stabilizing 'stakes', it intends to inspire its contemporary audience's awe by directing its attention to a common mythological notion that this audience held to be true. Islamic theologians thus take this and similar verses and reframe them as predictions.

In cases where the scientific or historical fact to which Muhammad is alluding is described accurately, modern Islamic theologians are required to engage in a double dehistoricization: firstly, the description must be reconceived as a prediction, and, secondly, the possibility of Muhammad acquiring the relevant fact through other than divine means must be precluded.

To achieve the latter, Islamic theologians will variously argue that the relevant fact was not known to anyone in the 7th century, that Arabia was prohibitively isolated from global currents of knowledge, that Muhammad in particular was isolated from knowledge in general, that Muhammad was illiterate and therefore incapable of accessing knowledge even if it were available to him, and/or that the mental capabilities of ancient persons were significantly less than those of modern persons.

Critics and historians have been unaccepting of either of these forms of dehistoricization and assiduously maintain that historical texts can only be understood in their historical context, that there is no fact accurately described in the Quran that was not also known in the 7th century, that Arabia evidently had access to global currents of knowledge, that there is no reason to believe that Muhammad was uniquely isolated from knowledge, that Muhammad was probably not illiterate, that if Muhammad was illiterate he would still be capable of significant learning in what was a primarily oral culture, and that there is no scientific evidence that ancient persons circa the 7th century were drastically less intelligent than modern persons.

Pseudo-correlation

Another common practice employed by Islamic theologians in making the case for scientific miracles in the Quran is drawing what are best described as pseudo-correlations between the Quran and scientific fact. This is achieved through: the use of decontextualized quotations from scientific publications, scientific and grammatical jargon in a confounding manner, metaphorical interpretations of science, equating the common historical observation of a phenomenon with its modern scientific explanation, as well as inaccurate or incorrect understandings of the relevant scientific fact.

In the case of the Quran 'predicting the stabilizing role of mountains', for instance, Islamic theologians suppose that the 'roots' of a mountain in some sense stabilize the Earth crust, whereas modern science does not hold this to be the case.

Critics suggest that where the science correlated to Quranic verses by Islamic theologians has been misunderstood, misapplied, or misrepresented, the case made for the scientific miracle is invalid.

Reinterpretation

It is also generally necessary for Islamic theologians to flout interpretive tradition (classical tafsirs) in their reading of the portion of the verse said to describe a scientific fact. The interpretations flouted sometimes include those provided by Muhammad himself and, much more frequently, those provided by Muhammad's companions (the Sahabah).

Specific examples of the types of shifts involved in this type of rereading include: taking verses from passages descriptive of the hereafter and interpreting them as descriptive of the modern era, taking verses from passages descriptive of supernatural or miraculous events and interpreting them as descriptive of eternal laws of nature, and taking verse from passages descriptive of particular historical events and interpreting them as eternal laws of human society.

This type of reinterpretation is particularly common in the West, where translations of scripture are often reworded in a manner that is distinct from the original Arabic text and which better accommodates or, at times, directly endorses the desired reinterpretation.

Critics and historians hold that this type of rereading strains credulity for its neglect of textual and historical context and, where it influences translations, have often condemned it as a form of academic and intellectual dishonesty. Critics also point out that flouting the early exegetical tradition, especially where it relies on and reiterates the perspective found in the narrations of Muhammad (hadiths) or the sayings of his companions (aqwal al-sahabah), undermines traditional Islamic doctrine which holds the word of Muhammad as final and which very often elevates the theological and exegetical statements of Muhammad's companions to status comparable to Muhammad's own words.

Disambiguation

The verses that appear to be best suited as candidates for scientific miracles are those verses comprised of words and phrases whose meaning is opaque and cryptic or whose meaning has simply been lost to time. Islamic theologians have most often used verse of this variety in order to make cases for scientific miracles in the Quran.

Critics have argued that if there is no justification for the highly specific reading projected upon an essentially ambiguous verse, then this cannot be considered miraculous.

Elective literalism

Sometimes, the verses presented by Islamic theologians as scientific miracles are verses containing a metaphor which taken literally appears to describe some scientific phenomenon. In many such cases, the same or similar metaphor or metaphorical word is used elsewhere in the Quran in a context which clarifies its meaning and where a literal reading results in no sensible interpretation.

Critics have argued that this effectively arbitrary and rare reading of metaphors in literal terms is tendentious and a practice which capitalizes on chance usage rather than anything that could seriously be described as an intended meaning on the part of the author(s).

Data mining

One recurring category of scientific miracles presented by Islamic theologians derive from compiling counts of individual root-words set in various grammatical forms throughout the text of the Quran. Words which happen to appear and equal number of times or in some interesting ratio are then presented as scientific miracles of a mathematical sort. Many variations on this sort of miracle case exist, with some theologians going to extraordinary ends to compile larges quantities of numbers calculated using various aspects of verses including their letter count, position in the surah, position the Quran, and other such aspects in order to find relationships.

Critics have argued that these purported miracles draw on the laws of probability and reveal nothing supernatural about the Quran.

Elective esotericism

A situation slightly different from standard cases of scientific miracles arises on occasion where the Quran describes a scientific phenomenon in relatively clear terms, albeit incorrectly. While these situations are not frequently attended to by modern Islamic theologians, they have at times insisted that while the apparent meaning of the verse may appear incorrect, they are in fact true in some esoteric sense. Despite being of an evidently lower caliber, these cases are also at times advanced as scientific miracles.

Philosophical concerns with methodology

Certain philosophical considerations have often been proposed as being of interest for those who either take the idea of scientific miracles in the Quran seriously or who are considering whether they should.

• The proposition that Humans have access to a miracle from God/gods would be incredibly consequential or at least extremely interesting if true, and thus deserves to be thought about with great seriousness and scrutiny. Otherwise, any number of contradictory parties would be able to claim that their respective scriptures contained scientific miracles.
• A god/gods desiring to present humankind with a miracle of scientific foreknowledge would need meet this justifiable scrutiny with a miracle so uniquely clear and sound as to distinguish itself from false miracle claims, else the god/gods would have failed in their purpose, which is a supposed impossibility. It would indeed have to be impossible to have reason to deny such a miracle - this is the meaning of certainty.
• A scriptural statement containing a scientific statement would be evident as a miracle if and only if it is at once: (1) unambiguous and intentional, (2) ascertainably unknowable at the time of revelation, and (3) scientifically sound, because:
  • (1) An ambiguous or unintentional scientific statement could be correct only by accident
  • (2) A scientific statement knowable at the time and place of revelation would not be a miracle
• Additionally, it may be that none of the above criteria can be established regarding any scientific statement because: (1) language is inherently ambiguous, (2) it is impossible to prove something is not an accident, and (3) history is fundamentally inaccessible. Nonetheless, one can and probably will disregard the skepticism necessitated by this last bullet point in their analysis.

Purported scientific miracles

Below are the most-often discussed of the many so-called scientific miracles of the Quran

The Big Bang

Many modern Islamic scholars have argued that Quran 21:30 describes the Big Bang. Historians, by contrast, have shown that the verse describes a version of world egg creation myth which was widely believed in earlier times through much of the world. According to the archetype of the myth, the Earth and heavens both existed in an egg-shaped structure which split (or hatched) to become the separate Earth and heaven, ushering in the era of mankind. In many versions, the first man appears as this earth-heaven structure 'hatches' open.

A universe from smoke

Many modern Islamic scholars and popular voices, such as Harun Yahya and I. A. Ibrahim, have argued that Quran 41:11contains an accurate account of the formation of stars and early phases of the Universe. Critics have pointed out that the phrasing is extremely vague and that in the context where the verse is found, a chronology of creation is described that in no way aligns with the history of the universe: the Earth is described as being created first, along with all that is present on its surface, and only thereafter is the starry sky created. Moreover, the point out, the 'heavens and earth' were never simultaneously smoke - for the Earth formed several billion years after matter had aggregated. several other criticism, described in the main article, have also been made.

Black holes and pulsars

Some modern Islamic scholars and popular voices, particularly Harun Yahya, have argued that the Quran 77:8 and Quran 86:1-3 contain an accurate descriptions of black holes and pulsars. Quran 77:8 speaks of the stars being "obliterated" or "effaced" and Quran 86:1-3 speaks of a star of "piercing brightness". Critics have argued that neither of these verses imply anything other than the eschatological disappearance and observable brightness of stars, neither of which statements is particularly noteworthy. Indeed, it is said, that the sense of the word used in Quran 77:8 which means "effaced" even suggests a solid firmament above the Earth upon which the stars are some sort of sprinkled light. Critics also point out that the same verse (Quran 77:8) is interpreted by Islamic figures, including Yahya, to describe both black holes and pulsars and that this is plainly impossible as the two are in no way the same phenomenon.

Speed of Light in the Qur'an

In an article published in Islami City, Dr. Mansour Hassab-Elnaby claims verse 32:5 reveals that light in one day travels a distance equal to 12,000 lunar orbits, and upon calculating that distance we find the exact speed of light.

Verse 32:5 has nothing to do with the speed of light. There is no mention of the moon, light or even distance in this verse. If these methods were to be applied to other texts, such as Shakespeare's writings or Virgil's Georgics, they too can be "proven" divine.

No matter how Dr. Hassab-Elnaby's calculations are viewed, they are mathematically incorrect. Even the notion of measuring the speed of light with the orbit of the Moon or the length of the day is a fallacy.

Dr. Hassab-Elnaby also makes many deliberate errors to doctor a scientific miracle, and in his enthusiasm to ascribe miracles to the Qur'an, he discards the concept of Allah's omnipresence. The creator of the Universe, according to him, depends on the speed of light to manage his affairs.

Finally, assuming there really is a miracle in this plagiarized allegory, should not the credit go to the Bible from which it originates?

Seven Heavens and Seven Earths

This article analyzes several different apologetic arguments claiming the Qur'an correctly asserts that there are "seven heavens" and "seven earths". In doing so, it finds the scientific evidence does not support any of the claims concerning the Qur'anic verse 65:12 and its scientific accuracy.

Earth's atmosphere is divided into five main layers based on temperature. Within these five principal layers, several secondary layers may be distinguished by other properties. There is no classification into 7 layers.

Modern geology states that there are only four or five layers of the Earth, or up to eight if the new hypotheses of the subcore georeactor are accepted. Without the double-counting of layers, There is no classification into 7 layers.

The number of continents is traditionally considered seven, but there are only six as Europe and Asia are technically a single land mass (i.e. Eurasia) and on the same tectonic plate. Therefore, the traditional number of seven continents is more a cultural bias than an actual geographical/geological fact.

Furthermore, if one delves a little deeper into the Islamic sources, it is discovered that the seven earths being referred to in verse 65:12 are in fact flat islands, one under the other.

Qur'an and the Descent of Iron

This article analyzes the ‘iron sent down from heaven miracle’. A chief proponent of this claim is Harun Yahya.

There is nothing miraculous about surah 57:26 describing iron being ‘sent down’ by a deity. The ancient Egyptians already derived that concept three thousand years before Islam. They called iron “ba-en-pet” or ‘metal from heaven’. This concept was also shared by the ancient Mesopotamians.

The term ‘anzala’ used to describe iron being ‘sent down’ is also used to describe cattle, garments, food, and the people of the book being ‘sent down’ by some deity. There is nothing to suggest that these too were not created in supernovae and sent down to earth. It is intellectually dishonest to assign a literal interpretation when referring to iron but figurative interpretations when referring to everything else without the evidence to distinguish when to use the literal as opposed to the figurative interpretation.

There is nothing miraculous about the surah reference and the atomic number of iron. This is mere coincidence as other metals are also mentioned in the Qur'an and their atomic numbers bear no relation to their surah references. To selectively assign miracles based on coincidence (since godly design is unproven) is a logical fallacy.

Thus there is nothing miraculous about surah 57:26 and the ‘descent’ of iron. The claims apologists make in this regard have either been known many centuries before Islam or are scientifically inaccurate.

Qur'an Describes Altitude Sickness (aka Hypoxia)

This article analyzes the apologetic claim that the Qur'an's description of altitude sickness is somehow miraculous, scientifically accurate, or prophetic.

If the verse is taken figuratively, then it is not miraculous, since it is describing a phenomenon that would have been well-known to the wandering Arab nomads long before the revelation of the Qur'an.

If the verse is taken literally, then it is scientifically inaccurate. There is no “tightening” of the chest. The constrictive sensation experienced at high altitudes is simply a result of having less air to breathe into your lungs, in addition to the gas already there actually expanding.

In fact, when modern scientific knowledge is taken into consideration, problems with a literal interpretation are two-fold since it has been postulated that human adaption has lead to people born and raised in high altitudes to have enlarged chests which "could allow for increased lung volumes and thereby increase oxygen uptake."

The Qur'an and Mountains

Many articles have been written in response to the claim that the Qur'an is validated by the geological science concerning mountains. This article adds to these by addressing several newer points that have been adopted to justify the original claim or to evade contrary scientific evidence.

The claim that mountains are pegs is untrue as not all mountains have "peg-like" roots. And even the ones that can be claimed to have these peg-like roots, resemble pegs only with a lot of imagination. The claim that mountains stabilize the crust or the earth is (at best) unproven. There is no scientific evidence for this assertion, therefore the Qur'an cannot be validated by scientific evidence that does not exist.

The mere fact of isostacy is not proof that mountains stabilize the crust or the earth. The mere fact that collision-type mountains are formed at the edges of tectonic plates is not proof that mountains stabilize the plates. The mere fact that mountains have deep roots is not proof that mountains stabilize anything.

Lastly, is the Qur'an really the first scripture to make the assertion that mountains stabilize the earth? Some Christians do not think so, and the Bible predates the Qur'an by at least 400 years.

Qur'an Predicted Land Decreasing

Dr. Al Zeiny, PhD, claims a so-called ‘proof’ of Qur'anic Science by positing the proposition that the Qur'an correctly predicted the geological fact that land is decreasing due to the movements of tectonic plates. He cites verses 13:41 and 21:44 as evidence.

The geological facts do not support Dr. Zeiny's case that land is decreasing as the Qur'an supposedly suggests. In fact, they prove that the geological information contained in the Qur'an is in error.

Land has not been decreasing at all over the past billion years. At present 29.1% of the total earth’s surface area is land. However, by the end of the Permian Period 200 million years ago, the supercontinent Pangaea covered only about a quarter of the earth’s surface.

Creation of Humans from Clay

This article analyzes Harun Yahya's claim that the Qur'an displays scientific foreknowledge by correctly asserting the creation of human beings from clay.

The Qur'an's assertion that humans are created from clay is not a scientific miracle because it is apparent that folkloric tales about the creation of humans from clay/earth/mud is very common throughout the world, and many of these tales pre-date the existence of Islam.

It is also scientifically inaccurate because the Islamic faith claims that human beings were created from clay, contrary to the scientific hypothesis that clay merely 'match-makes' RNA and membrane vesicles - and therefore does not form a building block.

Qur'an and Semen Production

This article analyzes the various attempts to show that the Qur'an correctly describes semen production from between the “sulb” and the “tara’ib” in verse 86:7.

There are several distinct classes of explanations, and none of them are supported by modern scientific knowledge and are frequently conflicting. For example, Ibn Kathir refers to tara’ib as a female organ, while other tafsirs claim it belongs to the man. Another conflict is the definition of sulb to mean either the backbone or the ‘hardening’ of the loins.

A point often missed, though alluded to by Dr. Campbell, is the phrase “min bain” which literally means “from between”. If this interpretation is accepted, which seems to be the case from a reading of the commonly accepted translations, then one must also note that semen emanates from the penis, and not from between the penis and the vagina. To be strictly correct, semen emanates from the penis into the vagina. This point seems to rule out tara’ib as being anything to do with the female sexual partner.

Qur'an Describes Gender Determination By Sperm

Various individuals have claimed the Qur'an is the only ancient book that states gender is determined by the sperm. In this, they may point out the ignorance of the Greeks who thought gender was determined by the relative strengths of sperm from the male and female parents as Hippocrates imagined.

This article does not seek to prove that the ancient Egyptians shared some aspects of the scientific understanding of gender determination and reproduction. It merely aims to show that the Qur'an was not the first religious text to suggest that gender is determined by the semen of the male parent.

In viewing the evidence, it is apparent that some of the ancient Egyptians believed that gender is created by the sperm from the male parent, and reproduction is via male and female union. This belief predated the Qur'an by about 2,900 years as evidenced by the pyramid text of Pharaoh Pepi I, 2332-2283 BC.

Qur'an and Embryology

There are propagations of Qur'anic Embryology by such luminaries as Dr. Keith Moore (alongside his co-author Abdul Majeed al-Zindani) and Dr. Maurice Bucaille. These works are copied by Dr. Al Zeiny, Dr. Zakir Naik, Dr. Ibrahim Syed, Dr. Sharif Kaf Al-Ghazal, Harun Yahya and others.

There are already many responses available. So here we will attempt to add to this debate, concentrating solely on the Qur'anic verses, because inclusion of the hadiths would clearly show up the unscientific nature of Qur'anic embryology. Dr. Omar Abdul Rehman’s article on the subject will be used as the basis for our analysis as it is clearly the most detailed.

Qur'anic Claim of Everything Created in Pairs

This article analyzes the claim that humans did not know anything about the "creation in pairs" at the time of the descent of the Qur'an. The case against the Qur'an is very simple. All one has to do is to show that not all creatures are created in pairs.

Based on the existence of the schizophyllum commune, and asexual, hermaphroditic and parthenogenetic organisms, the Qur'anic verses about Allah creating all creatures in pairs (male and female) are shown to be in error.

The ancient Chinese Yin-Yang duality principle proves that the spurious claim of ‘creation in pairs’ to mean matter-antimatter complements to be unremarkable. Besides, some Hindus make similar claims about the Rig-Veda as the Muslims make about the Qur'an and scriptural allusions to matter and antimatter.

Qur'an and the Lying Prefrontal Cerebrum

Several apologists promulgate Professor Keith L. Moore's Qur'anic science of the lying sinful prefrontal area of the cerebrum (here referred to as the prefrontal cerebrum). There are many web sites that are copy-pasting this proposition, and a search of the internet reveals that all the claims come from the same source, i.e. Keith Moore.

However, Modern medical research utilizing fMRI conduct brain scans has revealed that the prefrontal cerebrum is not responsible for lying. Other brain regions are responsible, particularly the anterior cingulate gyrus which lies in the medial part of the brain in the frontal-parietal area and not in the prefrontal cerebrum.

Thus, the scientific evidence does not support the claim that the Qur'an correctly asserts that the prefrontal region is responsible for lying as it is not the region responsible for the decision-making process of lying.

Meeting of Fresh and Salt Water in the Qur'an

Apologists believe that Surah 25:53 of the Qur’an is scientifically accurate concerning its description of the meeting of fresh and salt water. They conclude that since this process was unknown to humankind during the time of Prophet Muhammad, this verse (and the Qur’an as a whole) is revealed by Allah.

This article will prove that the verse in question is scientifically wrong, and show you how apologists make false statements and distort information in order to support their case. It will also demonstrate how a layman could make a better guess than the author of the Qur'an.

See also

• Scientific Errors in the Quran
• Islam and Science
• Islamic Prophecies

External links

• AnsweringIslam: The Haman Hoax

• The Rationalizer: Top scientists comment on the Quran (video playlist, Interviews with quote-mined scientists who supposedly approved the so-called scientific miracles)

References