177
edits
Talk:The Quran and Mountains: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
no edit summary
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
:I think it's true though that there is a need for better structuring and making it a bit more concise. The apologetic claims with mountains in the Quran are 1) The claim that they are like pegs in structure or function, and 2) that they stabilise the earth which comes in two flavours, a) the claim that they reduce earthquakes or b) the isostasy claim. As you've mentioned, these in fact are both scientific errors when properly analysed. Then there are in addition the other errors about mountains being cast down, and it's an ongoing process etc. where you made use of the scientific errors page. I'm not sure whether that should come first or after the other stuff but it needs to be well organized. | :I think it's true though that there is a need for better structuring and making it a bit more concise. The apologetic claims with mountains in the Quran are 1) The claim that they are like pegs in structure or function, and 2) that they stabilise the earth which comes in two flavours, a) the claim that they reduce earthquakes or b) the isostasy claim. As you've mentioned, these in fact are both scientific errors when properly analysed. Then there are in addition the other errors about mountains being cast down, and it's an ongoing process etc. where you made use of the scientific errors page. I'm not sure whether that should come first or after the other stuff but it needs to be well organized. | ||
:One other missing point that could be added in terms of the function of pegs issue is that pegs fasten one thing to another. While not obvious to some people from the images, it's worth pointing out that the mountains ''are'' part of the crust (not separate material like a peg) and they just go deeper into the mantel, which is molten and not a solid mass to which the mountains are fastening anything.[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 03:19, 19 October 2021 (UTC) | :One other missing point that could be added in terms of the function of pegs issue is that pegs fasten one thing to another. While not obvious to some people from the images, it's worth pointing out that the mountains ''are'' part of the crust (not separate material like a peg) and they just go deeper into the mantel, which is molten and not a solid mass to which the mountains are fastening anything.[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 03:19, 19 October 2021 (UTC) | ||
:Your response is Highly appreciable. You have made very good and strong points. | |||
(1) Your criticism of the tradition of History is Yaqubi is correct and it does praise Muhammad later. | |||
(2) What do you think about the verse of "placing the mountains from above"? Could it be used? | |||
(3) Regarding Verse 70:4. Yes, Muslims will use it as an excuse. But question is if we should step back and let them go away by making such excuse, or will it be BENEFICIAL if we counter their excuse with arguments/proofs? For example, we could refute the verse 70:4 by saying: "The Critics point out that vIt sereems to me that we have better proofs and better chances as compared to the Muslim on the back foot on this issue. Please note, I am not talking about the "absolute proof/chance", but about having "better proof/chance" than the other side. | |||
* We | |||
could be used to claim that there are contradictions and Quran and it was a human writing, and thus | |||