3,454
edits
Scientific Miracles in the Quran: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
| [checked revision] | [checked revision] |
Lightyears (talk | contribs) (Automated script replacing USC-MSA hadith numbering system for Bukhari, Muslim, and Abu Dawud) |
Lightyears (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category:Miracles]] | [[Category:Miracles]] | ||
[[Category:Islam and Science]] | [[Category:Islam and Science]] | ||
{{QualityScore|Lead=4|Structure= | {{QualityScore|Lead=4|Structure=4|Content=4|Language=4|References=4}}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. Tellingly, 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. | ||
Even when the Islamic empires led the world in science in parts of the middle ages,<ref>''[https://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/30/science/how-islam-won-and-lost-the-lead-in-science.html How Islam Won, and Lost, the Lead in Science.]'' Dennis Overbye. 2001. New York Times. | Even when the Islamic empires led the world in science in parts of the middle ages,<ref>''[https://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/30/science/how-islam-won-and-lost-the-lead-in-science.html How Islam Won, and Lost, the Lead in Science.]'' Dennis Overbye. 2001. New York Times. | ||
| Line 209: | Line 209: | ||
Critics of the miracle claim sometimes also point out that the ancient Greek philosopher Empedocles had proposed that all living things are made from water, among other substances<ref>Frag. B17, (Simplicius, ''Physics'', 157-159)</ref>, and Thales of Miletus taught that the originating principle of everything including life is water.<ref>[https://iep.utm.edu/thales/#H5 Thales of Miletus] - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy</ref> | Critics of the miracle claim sometimes also point out that the ancient Greek philosopher Empedocles had proposed that all living things are made from water, among other substances<ref>Frag. B17, (Simplicius, ''Physics'', 157-159)</ref>, and Thales of Miletus taught that the originating principle of everything including life is water.<ref>[https://iep.utm.edu/thales/#H5 Thales of Miletus] - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy</ref> | ||
Just as with the above [[Scientific Miracles in the Quran#The Big Bang|big bang alleged miracle]], it is worth noting that | Just as with the above [[Scientific Miracles in the Quran#The Big Bang|big bang alleged miracle]], it is worth noting that Q21:30 assumes that these ideas (all living things being made from water, and the Earth and skies being split) are already accepted by the (pre-scientific) pagan Arabs, somewhat negating the idea that this is a scientific miracle.<ref name=":0" /> Rather, the polemical point being made here is that given God can do these things then why would they question God's power for e.g. resurrection, not disputing the common motifs themselves. | ||
===Black holes and pulsars=== | ===Black holes and pulsars=== | ||