Scientific Miracles in the Quran: Difference between revisions

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.

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).  

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.

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.

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.

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)]].

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.

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.

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).

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.

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.

==Purported miracles==