WikiIslam

Scientific Miracles in the Quran: Difference between revisions

Page Discussion

Scientific Miracles in the Quran (view source)

Revision as of 22:12, 30 January 2021

218 bytes removed ,  30 January 2021
no edit summary
[checked revision][checked revision]
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{QualityScore|Lead=3|Structure=1|Content=2|Language=1|References=1}}
{{QualityScore|Lead=3|Structure=2|Content=2|Language=1|References=1}}
In recent times, many Muslim scholars have interpreted certain [[Qur'an|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 recent times, many Muslim scholars have interpreted certain [[Qur'an|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.
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.
{{Core}}
==Methodology of Islamic theologians==
==Methodology of Islamic theologians==
===Presenting vague verses as very specific===
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.
Many verses of the Quran are vague, but apologists force very specific interpretations on them and then claim that the specific information is in the verse when in fact it isn't.
 
===Mistranslations===
Sometimes when the verse looks similar to something scientific, but there is something in the verse that doesn't fit, apologists will mistranslate the problematic part to hide it. Mistranslation can also help make a vague verse look more specific.
 
===Data-mining===
Sometimes apologists don't use the text of the Quran, but rather count verses and chapters and try to find some interesting coincidences and then they cherry-pick them and present them as the rule. But interesting coincidences should be expected from any text, there's nothing miraculous about numerical co-incidences.
 
===Presenting parables as literal descriptions of nature===
The Quran uses parables. When the Quran says something like "the disbeliever is like a mountain that...". If the parable mentions something special about the mountain, it was mentioned because of the parable, not because it happens in mountains in nature. So if something in the parable is similar to something that is literally true, then it's a coincidence, not a miracle.
 
===Ignoring alternative explanations===
If the Quran says something counter-intuitive about nature. For example that "mountains will move" and then science discovers that mountains are actually moving, it doesn't necessarily mean that the author of the Quran knew it. He could have just tried to make a shocking descriptions (of the Judgement Day). Mountain is something that is generally considered as not moving, so the author says it will move, to make the story interesting. Not because he knows that mountains are actually moving.


And the counter-intuitive descriptions of nature are often in the context of description of the Judgement Day, so it can't be a description of our universe today.
=== Methodology ===


===Ignoring the fact that the scientific interpretation came only after science made the discovery===
==== Dehistoricization ====
After science discovers something, Islamic apologists come with absolute confidence, claiming that it was already mentioned in the Quran. But how can they be so sure that it is in the Quran, when none of the Islamic scholars interpreted the verse in this way before the scientific discovery was made? None of the "scientific miracle" claims contain a sentence of humility like "This is just an interpretation." or "Maybe it's not the original meaning."
The most common practice in making the case for a scientific miracle in the Quran is dehistoricization. Simply put, 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).  


If the scientific miracle was ''clearly'' there, Muslims would make the scientific discovery a long time ago.
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.


===Presenting Quranic descriptions of the Judgement Day as descriptions of the current universe===
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.
The Quran describes many supernatural event that will happen on the Judgement Day. The Judgement Day didn't happen yet. So descriptions of the Judgement Day don't apply to our universe today (before the Judgement day). But the apologists take these descriptions and try to interpret them as descriptions of the current world.


===Presenting descriptions of supernatural events as descriptions of nature===
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.
The Quran describes many supernatural events that were done by Allah. If Allah did it, then it means it probably isn't something that just happens in nature regularly. But when the supernatural event resembles something that science discovered happens in nature, apologists will say that the Quran describes the natural phenomena.


===Presenting knowledge of history as a miracle===
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.
It's not miraculous if Muhammad knew about something that happened before. All he needed was to hear someone tell the history.


===Presenting description of an event as a description of a general rule===
==== Pseudo-correlation ====
If the Quran says that something happened one time, or will happen one time, then we can't say that the Quran predicted that in similar conditions the same thing will happen. For example, the Quran says that women will miscarry on the Judgement Day. Apologists then say that the Quran knew that stress can cause miscarriage. But the Quran didn't say it and didn't say the exact reason why the women will miscarry on the Judgement Day.
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.


===Quoting the Quran out of context===
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.
The context often demolishes the miracle. Sometimes the context is a description of the Judgement day, or it is a parable, or it gives a specific meaning to the vague verse. The vague verses can often be interpreted specifically when they are compared with other verses, which then shows that the apologetic interpretation is wrong.


===Quoting scientific information out of context===
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.
Sometimes the Quran says something that could be considered scientific, but it's not that right. So apologists quote some part of a scientific article that makes the Quran look right. All you have to to debunk that miracle is to read the original article, but unfortunately many people will just believe the apologists and their citation.


===Lying about science===
==== Reinterpretation ====
For example in Fat Miracle in the Quran, apologists claimed it's not possible to burn fat by sprinting, only because it helped their miracle claim.
It is also generally necessary for Islamic theologians to flout interpretive tradition (classical [[Tafsir|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 [[Sahabah|Muhammad's companions (the Sahabah)]].


===Assuming that a description of a phenomena means understanding of the phenomena===
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.
It's easy to describe a phenomena how it looks. But it's not easy to explain why it happens. But apologists just take a verse that describes a natural phenomena, the description is on a level of a 7th century Arab, and then they add a scientific article which explains it and claim that the author of the Quran also understood it.


===Assuming that the information wasn't known===
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.
Sometimes the Quran says something related to science and it is right, but it's not new information. It is something that was already known. So it can't be a scientific miracle, but apologists present it as such.


===Assuming Arabia was isolated from information===
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 ([[Hadith|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.
Apologists stress that the 7th century was primitive and information from other places couldn't have gotten to Arabia. But how is it possible that Alexander the Great in 3rd century BC conquered territory from Greece to India and in the 1st century, the Roman Empire had relations with China, but in the 7th century, sill no information from outside got to Arabia?


The same argument is also used for religious information about Judaism and Christianity. The Old Testament mentions Arabs on many places <ref>https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/encyclopedia-of-the-bible/Arabian-Arabians-Arabs</ref>. How is it possible that the Jews knew about Arabs, but Arabs didn't know anything about the Jews and their religion? Not to mention that there were Jews living in the Arabian peninsula during time of Muhammad.
==== 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.


===Assuming Muhammad was isolated from information===
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.
Some apologists stress that Muhammad lived in pagan environment in Mecca, so he didn't know the Bible. We know that Muhammad went to Syria on a business trip, so his reach wasn't limited to his little city. We also know that he spent a lot of time with Waraqa ibn Nawfal, who was a Christian.


===Appeal to Muhammad's illiteracy===
==== Elective literalism ====
Firstly it's not clear that he was illiterate and secondly illiteracy doesn't prevent a person from listening.
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.
{{Main|Muhammad and illiteracy|l1=Muhammad and illiteracy}}


===Underestimating the intellect of 7th century people===
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).
Apologists like to assume that 7th century people didn't know or understand anything and therefore any information for them was a scientific miracle. But for example in embrology, people knew that sex is necessary and they knew that the baby then grows inside the woman, so by common sense they could understand that there must be some stages of the development of the embryo. Probably the muscles and bones had to develop and so on.. Apologists are quick to say that the people couldn't have guessed it, but they don't even try to imagine if the thoughts were really un-achievable in the 7th century.


===Ignoring classical interpretations===
==== Data mining ====
There are already accepted interpretations in the tafsirs (of Ibn Kathir, al-Jalalayn..). The tafsirs are basing their interpretation on comparing the verses with other verses and on interpretations of the early Muslims and scholars. So how can a new interpretation be better? The apologists usually don't put any effort into disproving the classical interpretations. As long as apologists don't prove that the classical interpretation is wrong, they can't claim that the miracle claim is definitely there.
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.


==="Man can't write it, therefore Allah wrote it"===
Critics have argued that these purported miracles draw on the laws of probability and reveal nothing supernatural about the Quran.
This fallacy is committed many times by Muslim apologists (the same fallacy is committed in "bring sura like it" challenge). They assume that if a text can't be written by mere humans (which is already baseless assumption), then the only author could have been god. While there are many possible supernatural beings. Like Satan, or jinn, or other beings that are more powerful than human and could have known what humans discovered much later.


===Using impressive fancy words===
==== Elective esotericism ====
Sometimes apologists use a scientific word that sounds impressive to people who don't know science (and the meaning of the word), but in reality the meaning of the word is primitive. And this way apologists create a false impression that Quran talks about complicated science in people who don't understand science. For example the Isotropy miracle.
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.


===Complete gibberish===
=== Philosophical concerns with methodology ===
This is the most helpless tactic. Apologists want to prove that some impressive scientific information is in the Quran, so they start with the Quran and then they make '''any''' kind of construction as long as the conclusion is that the scientific information is in the Quran. The most obvious example is Singularity in the Quran miracle, where the logic is "Allah swears by the stars and Allah is one (=singluar), therefore the Quran says that stars can become a singularity".


==Purported miracles==
==Purported miracles==
IbnPinker
Editors, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers
6,633

edits

Retrieved from "http://wikiislamica.net/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/127719"