This is UTDForce, but I have been locked out of my account and can't login for some reason. I contacted the admins but they aren't active right now so until they help me recover my account I will post from this acc. I unfortunately cannot delete spam posts and couldn't for a couple of months now and as I see the bots have kinda taken over so until that account is back we're gonna have to wait for someone else to remove the spam posts.With that out of the way I have some corrections to my last reply and I'm going to use an atheist's reply to my post and how I replied to him/her in this post:
Ask yourself this question. If the moon was a source of light and not reflected, would this verse still be true? Could this verse also support a moon that emits light?
If male spiders made webs more than females, I would bet you would be able to claim the opposite because the verse is vague and doesn't much any specifics.
Concerning yourself with what if instead of what is.
Firstly, the verse used تاء التأنيث الساكنة which is used for the past feminine verb which can't be used with the past masculine verb.
" مَثَلُ الَّذِينَ اتَّخَذُوا مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ أَوْلِيَاءَ كَمَثَلِ الْعَنكَبُوتِ اتَّخَذَتْ بَيْتًا ۖ وَإِنَّ أَوْهَنَ الْبُيُوتِ لَبَيْتُ الْعَنكَبُوتِ ۖ لَوْ كَانُوا يَعْلَمُونَ (41) "
Quran Surah 29:41 سورة العنكبوت
Secondly our moon has reflected light. And the word نور used for the light of the moon means a light gained from another source.
والنور لما بالعَرَض والاكتساب من جسم آخر كنور القمر. المعجم الوسيط صفحة 546 منتصف الصفحة، الضوء.
To state that heavenly bodies orbit, is a common observation made by anyone looking at the stars, which people do when there isn't much else to look at.
Nope, it isn't a common observation, from earth you can't see that the other planets are in their own orbits.
Even though you didn't specify a source on when greek books were in the middle east you still can't deny that the greek wrote and believed in a lot of wrong things, which leaves us at the probability of choosing the correct statements from them and leaving the wrong ones.
I impore you to realize that the Quran does not contain scientific miracles, only vague verses which can be intepretted to fit many hypothesis and theories.
As I said I believe in the Quran completely and the scientific miracles aren't the only reason I do. I believe the more we advance in knowledge the more we understand the Quran. And your answers did not disprove that the quran has scientific miracles.
The verses aren't vague but we understand more of them the more we study the Quran and advance in knowledge.
And can completely contradict modern science like the creation of humans.
Long reply incoming.
I'm a pharmacist and I enjoy learning about biology and such so I'll give you some papers to read and see if you still think the evolution of humans is a clear ladder or not, or how each fossil they find supports the ladder they already made before finding the fossil or not.
"Moroccan fossil find rearranges Homo sapiens family tree"
https://phys.org/news/2017-06-moroccan-fossil-rearranges-homo-sapiens.html They stretched the appearance of homo sapiens to 300,000 years ago.
"They have discovered human fossils and simple stone tools dating back more than 780 000 years."
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg14719912-400-first-europeans-remain-in-spain/ Have humans appeared before the 'ancestors'? But wait until you read the next ones.
" we must rethink human evolution to fit that face, says Arsuaga. The Gran Dolina face is 800,000 years old and yet distinctively ours. It is almost that of a modern human."
https://www.discovermagazine.com/planet-earth/the-face-of-an-ancestral-child Then they called the fossil the Homo antecessor trying to make it look like it's not human. Nature then published that his/her face is like our face.
"the modern-like face of H. antecessor—that is, similar to that of modern humans"
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2153-8?proof=trueMay "The evolutionary history of humans is complex and unresolved. It now looks set to be thrown into further confusion by the discovery of another species and genus, dated to 3.5 million years ago."
https://www.nature.com/articles/35068648 We aren't talking about some 100,000 years now we are talking about millions of years.
"The discovery of a 3.5-million-year-old hominid skull and other fossil remains in northern Kenya is shaking the human family tree at its very roots"
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2001/03/skull-further-obscures-human-origins "Experts and unanimous in the opinion that Kenyanthropus will complicate efforts to trace the convoluted course of human evolution."
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/291/5512/2289.full These what experts say not a 'regular guy'.
Now what about 6 or 7 million years ago?
"After a decade of digging through the sand dunes of northern Chad, Michel Brunet found a skull 6-7 million years old. He named it Toumaï."
"Toumaï is the tip of that iceberg - one that could sink our current ideas about human evolution. "Anybody who thinks this isn't going to get more complex isn't learning from history," says Wood."
""When I went to medical school in 1963, human evolution looked like a ladder," he says. The ladder stepped from monkey to man through a progression of intermediates, each slightly less ape-like than the last.
Now human evolution looks like a bush."
" How they are related to each other and which, if any of them, are human forebears is still debated."
https://www.nature.com/news/2002/020711/full/news020708-12.html This makes that you can't say the 'ancestors' of humans that appeared after it are actually ancestors. As it looks more like a human skull the the ones that came after it.
Don't forget that nature is one of the biggest supporters of evolution.
"Until a few years ago, the evolutionary history of our species was thought to be reasonably straightforward."
"But lately, confusion has been sown in the human evolutionary tree."
https://www.nature.com/articles/35068648 "Earliest modern human-like hand bone from a new >1.84-million-year-old site at Olduvai in Tanzania"
https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms8987 .
"so we just don't know how many species there were, which belong to which," Professor Groves said."
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-05/fossil-jaw-a-missing-link-in-the-human-evolution-puzzle/6281236 "Three human-like species lived side-by-side in ancient Africa."
"We once thought of human evolution as a linear progression, with modern humans emerging at the end as the pinnacle of evolutionary development. But everywhere we look, it's increasingly clear the real picture was much messier."
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-52133534 So they thought the first humans appeared in Ethiopia, but then they found fossils in Chad, Kenya, Morocco and Tanzania. So they said humans appeared in Africa.
Then they found the fossils in Asia.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1040618215001160 "Recent Discoveries Have Overhauled Our Picture of Where Humans Came From, And When"
"Taken together, these breakthroughs suggest that many of our previous ideas about the human origin story – who we are and where we came from – were wrong."
https://www.sciencealert.com/these-recent-discoveries-change-the-picture-of-where-humans-came-from-and-when So what is it? A clear ladder or convoluted, messy, sunk, obscure, complex and shaking from its roots?
On a similar note here are a couple of videos from Dr. Eyad Qunaibi explaining the creation of humans and the origin of life. It is currently only in Arabic, but he is translating the episodes to other languages.
It's an advice from a human to a fellow human being, open your heart and check his series, it will benefit you إن شاء الله .
The creation of humans which I used sources from above:
The origin of life:
A stake usually implies being driven down into the earth, when in fact mountains are driven up by the Earth.
That is my bad I guess, as the translation says stakes but the Quran is better understood in Arabic, the word used in Arabic is أوتاد which is also used for the teeth of the mouth which aren't driven down but protrude through the gums.
Maajim source
A reasonable assumption to make considering nothing in a desert survives without access to water. That life appear to flourish around sources of water like rivers.
BTW, all life are also made of many elements forming complex molecules, so stating that we are made of air or rocks isn't wrong.
The more we advance in knowledge the more we know how important water is to living creatures.
We are made up of 71% water, blood is 55% plasma which is mostly water. Many vitamins and nutritional substances are water soluble. Water is needed in many reactions and physiologic processes from absorption to excretion. Cells exchanging with each other, interstitial fluid. We need water and depend on it in our bodies in ways that could not be known by natural observation alone but by microscopy and that was not known 1400 years ago, only in recent advances in biology, biotechnology and physiology.
There is no life without water. Not just that life flourishes around it, but that life is absent where water is absent.
This is just stating that God creates our bones down to our fingertips. It doesn't state anything about 'reconstructing' fingerprints, or how fingertips would be especially difficult to recreate since each person has unique fingerprints.
" Yes ˹indeed˺! We are ˹most˺ capable of restoring ˹even˺ their very fingertips. "
Quran 75:4
Allah clearly mentioned the fingertips, why would he while they seem simpler than the complicated systems inside the body? (to the eyes of people 1400 years ago). Why is it talked about as if it isn't a simple task?
They were capable of making observations and correct theories about our universe and how it functions. People didn't have the information we have today, but they weren't stupid.
The lesser fraction of their information turned out to be true today, again the probability of picking the correct and leaving the wrong from different societies with different beliefs that is considering knowledge from other societies was shared with the muslims.
Also you quoted the verse "Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and We separated them" which implies Earth is not currebtly part of the heavens or a heavenly body.
Nope, the verse doesn't imply that the earth is no longer a heavenly body.
Now about the plants I do admit that I have misunderstood the tafsir and will be removing it, thank you and the other muslim brothers here for bringing that to my attention as that was a grave mistake. I pray that ego never stops me from backing off a false statement or action that I take or say. So I'll be removing that part from the thread.
However plants reproducing asexually does not disprove the Quran as by studying the tafsir more, the word pairs is used for pairs in; male and female, the opposites; e.g. day and night, the identical (I use identical but I don't have a better word that I know in English, sorry) things; the eyes.
But what about asexual reproduction? The mother amoeba and the daughter amoeba are pairs. Even then (during mitosis) the chromosomes, which are made from two chromatids, are in even numbers.
If you are interested in knowing more about pairs I'd recommend taking a quick read on DNA replication, mitosis and asexual reproduction.
Except you will continue to believe in it, because you will simply re-intepret the verse until it either matches our current scientific understanding, or you will ignore the science altogether,
This was answered above, but to repeat, the scientific miracles, which exist in the quran alongside other miracles, aren't the only reason I totally believe in the Quran and the more knowledge we have the more we understand the holy quran.
For anyone who is interested, here is an intellectual debate between professor Lawrence Krauss and Hamza Tzortzis - Islam vs Atheism Debate:
