An open letter to Hamza Tzortzis and iERA

Dear Hamza,
I read with interest your recent paper ..A new approach...in which you admit to an apparent change of heart regarding the veracity of scientific miracles in the Qur'an, explaining how the "claims of miraculousness via verses eluding to natural phenomena does not stand in light of intellectual scrutiny".
I am glad that someone in a position of some influence within the Islamic dawah community has made such a bold and, on the face of it, unequivocal statement. Nonetheless, your admission raises some important issues which your paper fails to address.
Firstly, although you make reference to the "significant number of apostates from Islam who cite the counter movement’s work as a causal factor in deciding to leave the religion", you signally fail to mention the concomitant large number of (usually) westerners whose vulnerability has been exploited  by dawahists to convert them in the first place using the scientific miracle narrative. 
If my Muslim friend is typical, and I have no reason to doubt it, there will be many thousands of individuals whose main reason for becoming Muslim was the apparent proof of the divine nature of the Qur'an to be found in the so-called preternatural knowledge of scientific facts contained within it.
The iERA, whose research team you head, has used this claim as the main thrust in its proselytising since its inception. The Man in the Red Underpants, published and distributed by the iERA in August 2011, is a case in point. In it we read the following:

Actually what is remarkable about the Quran is not only that it does not contain any contradictions , but in fact it seems to be making statements about history, theology, philosophy, law and the natural world that defies a normal human explanation..

The pamphlet goes on to talk about, inter alia, the Big Bang Theory, embryonic development and plate tectonics and concludes,

It is easy to understand how the Creator would know about the common origin of the universe, the details of embryonic development and that mountains have roots but it is not easy to explain how Muhammad managed to include the information in the Qur'an unless we accept his claim to be a Messenger. It would seem that accepting this would be the most sensible thing for a rational, sincere person to do.

This publication is still available and there is  a FaceBook page  run by iERA entitled The Man in the Red Underpants which hosts debates about science in the Qur'an.
If you are genuine in regretting your involvement in helping to publicise such misleading ideas, then can we expect you to do everything in your power to prevent further damage being done by the iERA's involvement in this shameful episode? Can we look forward, for example, to your removing any references to scientific miracles in iERA's literature?
Further, and more pertinently given the above, can we also expect an apology for the huge damage done by this campaign. For as your confederate at iERA, Mr Green, says on page 25 of his pamphlet: "Certainly none of us wants to be conned or taken for a ride by a fraudster".
Indeed.
An apology is surely the very least those who have converted on the strength of your misinformation deserve.

Secondly, the scientific miracle claims are, of course, but one part of a sustained attempt to convince the unwary and naive of the miraculous nature of the Qur'an. Equally reprehensible in the eyes of many is the dawahist obsession with proving the existence of historic miracles. It is noteworthy that your paper fails to address this, other than to suggest that when talking about the Qur'an Muslims should speak about "the fact that there are historical statements that are mentioned in the Qur’ān which were not known at the time"
This is despite your quoting Maurice Bucaille as a source for the science claims.
Bucaille, of course, is responsible for one of the most infamous and despicable claims for miraculous historic knowledge in the Qur'an: that of the preservation of Pharaoh's body. Your suggestion that Muslims should talk about "historical statements"  indicates that you possibly intend for iERA to pursue this line of argument in future dawah initiatives. If so, your statement regarding the science miracles in the Qur'an begins to ring a little hollow. For there is absolutely no evidence for this particular miracle whatsoever. Nor is there any proper evidence for the other claims for miraculous historical knowledge.

In your paper you say that you believe that the apostasy of those westerners who have become disenchanted with the miracle claims  is "not entirely an intellectual decision but rather a spiritual and psychological problem." It may well be that their leaving your religion has caused them deep spiritual or psychological problems, but you fail to address the most worrying aspect of this whole affair. For you seem to be assuming that because the trauma caused by your meddling is spiritual and psychological, the answer to their problem lies in a similar approach to Islam/dawah. No, the answer lies in not making fraudulent claims to convert people. What a pity you and your fellow meddlers at iERA didn't think of that in the first place. 
But perhaps we can surmise the reason why such an approach wasn't adopted. Might it be that you knew, as the author of the Man in the Red Underpants suggests, that the thought of following "a religion which demands that those who steal should have their hands cut off" and that allows men "to beat their wives on certain occasions", "to have up to four wives and unlimited concubines" and tells us to "fight and kill the unbelievers wherever you find them" might be anathema to liberal westerners. 
The author bravely challenges his readers to ask if, just because such things lie uneasily with modern ethics, it means they can't be from God: "Perhaps the Creator doesn't like modernity or any other man-made ideology."
But he obviously knows what the likely response would be - just like you and all other Muslim evangelists do - and that is why you and they have had recourse to Rational Islam: Look!  Don't rely on anything as old fashioned as faith - Let us show you how to use your education and reasoning to come to Allah! We can PROVE God wrote the Qur'an.

Except of course, as we and you now know, you can't. Because faith requires er...faith.

So how about removing ALL miracle claims from the iERA's dawah material? How about discussing Islam honestly with putative converts and addressing the issues which bother them? Forget miracles, Hamza. I know it's difficult to break the habit. Resist the lure of the literary miracle. The Qur'an may be good... in parts, but it really isn't that amazing. Give up on embryology. Leave the historic statements where they are. We don't want a new approach (Which to judge from your paper is just a euphemism for saying you can't prove the science miracles but you'll still discuss the "amazing" knowledge within the Qur'an). 
We simply want you to stop desperately trying to turn the Qur'an into something it isn't. It's not a supernatural almanac. It's not a miraculous science book. It's simply a religious text. You believe it's from God. I don't. Let's leave it at that. And if you have to resort to magic, you're actually doing an ancient religion a disservice.

Oh, and one final thing: will those who used these dishonest and fraudulent claims to convert the naive and unwary still gain the benefit of their converts' (and their converts' children's) good works in paradise according to your bizarre rules? For it is surely the thought of all the dubious rewards that awaits your fellow dawahists in Paradise and your publicising of them on the iERA website that is in part responsible for their over-zealous and damaging evangelising. 

Allah's obfuscation and Hamza's conversion

How long do you think it reasonable to allow the adherents of a religion to decipher the enigmatic, rich, multi-faceted and complex language of their God's final message to mankind before we can justifiably ask them what it means? 10 years? 50 years? 100 years even? What if some of those followers are so single-minded in their desire to understand their holy text that they devote their whole lives to the quest? How many lifetimes of study is it reasonable to allow before we should expect clarity on certain basic issues?
Some might argue that if a holy text claims to be a perfect message then it should at least fulfill the basic requirements of communication and be understandable by those to whom it is addressed without the need for expert interpretation . But this is not the case with the Qur'an.
After nearly one and a half thousand years of intense- some might say obsessive - study, there remain passages that are so opaque, references so esoteric, or names so exotic that they have defeated the best efforts of literally billions of man-hours of study.
Who, for example, is Zul-Qarnain, the powerful and enigmatic Muslim mentioned in the Qur'an who travelled to the ends of the Earth ? Ask some Muslims, but don't expect a clear, logical or consistent answer.
In my last post I examined verses 83-99 of surah 18 and suggested that if Zul-Qarnain was actually Alexander the Great then this proved that the Qur'an was written by a fallible human. (Since Alexander was a homosexual, pagan idolater whereas the Qur'an tells us Zul-Qarnain was a great Muslim.) I referred to the numerous tafsirs and Islamic experts who had all agreed that Zul-Qarnain was Alexander. However, when I debated this with my convert friend he, like so many modern Islamic apologists, told me that

 some commentators speculated that Dhul Qarnayn was Alexander the Great, many did not, and the Quran does not state that he was. 

How can this be? How can there be disagreement on such a fundamental issue as the identity of such a powerful Muslim?  If the Qur'an is supposed to be unimprovable and perfect, how is it that it is so impenetrable that even the so-called experts cannot agree on who this person is and thus what he is doing and why, and what the message is we are supposed to glean from it? 
Perhaps you're thinking that our inability to fathom God's wisdom is our fault. I would counter that God, being omniscient, knows our intellectual limitations and would surely make his final message to us decipherable - if not immediately, then surely after 1,400 years of intense scrutiny! That's not asking too much, is it?

How about trying to fathom the meaning of verses 5-7 of surah 86 which state that semen comes from between the backbone and the ribs. Or perhaps it doesn't. Because there are seven distinct classes of explanation. Mainly because the most obvious one leaves the Qur'an open to accusations of plagiarising Greek ideas from a thousand years before. The verdict is still out on the exact meaning of that one. Still, we've only had a millennium and a half to work on it, so let's not be too impatient.

Or how about the verses where God tells us that mountains stop Earth quakes? No, He doesn't. He tells us that mountains help stabilise the Earth's crust using isostasy. Or does He? Who knows. Certainly the experts can't seem to agree.

Or how about the extent of the Flood. It covered the world say the tafsirs. No, it was local, say the modern apologists.  Then how come the Ark came to rest 7,000 feet above sea level? Wouldn't that suggest a global catastrophe?

Now before I am bombarded by comments telling me that the multifarious interpretations of the text simply bear witness to the complex beauty and timeless appeal of the Qur'an, I should reiterate that I am not referring here to spiritual or moral teachings contained in the Qur'an. I am as capable as the next man of appreciating that great literature has depth of meaning. No, what I am talking about is quite simply the apparent inability of generations of desperate readers to agree on the basics. 

And now, we have one of the stalwarts of the iERA miracle seeker community, Hamza Tzortzis no less, releasing a paper in which he admits to an almost damascene conversion and reveals to his readers that his reading of the Qur'an regarding its scientific miracles has been er....wrong. 
I'm sorry, but I would need clarity on these issues if I were to devote my existence to believing in a Creator who demands total submission to His frankly bizarre notions of how the world works which seem to fly in the face of science, common sense and basic humanity. And all we seem to have after more than a thousand years of trying to understand God's meaning is confusion and disagreement.

Perhaps Hamza's paper is the first crack that will allow the light of reason and common sense to shine on a dark and shameful episode in the long history of religious mendacity. Perhaps.

Finally, here's a question for Hamza, his acolytes at iERA and all those others who can't seem to give me a straight answer: How is it possible to believe in a God whose final, perfect message to His creation is not fit for purpose because we still don't know what He actually means?

Don't bring your woolly liberal thinking in here...

Thanks to Jesus and Mo - genius.
[In case you can't read the headline in Jesus' paper: Pope Says Gays Okay (women still dodgy)]

How Alexander the Great proves Muhammad wrote the Qur'an

For a long time I thought that Muslims everywhere accepted that the figure of Zul-Qarnain, who appears in Surah 18 of the Qur'an, was Alexander the Great. Certainly the tafsirs and experts agreed; Ibn Hisham was probably the first (c800) but the tafsirs from the 10th century onward all come to the same conclusion. Yusuf Ali, the famous Islamic scholar and translator of the Qur'an studied the episode in depth and wrote this in the appendix to his translation:
"I have not the least doubt that Zul-qarnain is meant to be Alexander the Great, the historic Alexander, and not the legendary Alexander, of whom more presently. My first appointment after graduation was that of lecturer in Greek history. I have studied the details of Alexander's extraordinary personality in Greek historians as well as in modern writers, and have since visited most of the localities connected with his brief but brilliant career."

However, there is body of opinion in the Islamic community which is keen to deny the link. Why should this be?
Firstly, let us examine the salient verses Surah 18.

Verse	Abdullah Yusuf Ali	Pickthall
18:83	They ask thee concerning Zul-qarnain Say, "I will rehearse to you something of his story."	They will ask thee of Dhu'l-Qarneyn. Say: "I shall recite unto you a remembrance of him."
18:84	Verily We established his power on earth, and We gave him the ways and the means to all ends.	Lo! We made him strong in the land and gave him unto every thing a road.
18:85	One (such) way he followed,	And he followed a road
18:86	Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it set in a spring of murky water: near it he found a people: We said: "O Zul-qarnain! (thou hast authority), either to punish them, or to treat them with kindness."	Till, when he reached the setting-place of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring, and found a people thereabout. We said: "O Dhu'l-Qarneyn! Either punish or show them kindness."
18:87	He said: "Whoever doth wrong, him shall we punish; then shall he be sent back to his Lord; and He will punish him with a punishment unheard-of (before).	He said: "As for him who doeth wrong, we shall punish him, and then he will be brought back unto his Lord, Who will punish him with awful punishment!"
18:88	"But whoever believes, and works righteousness, he shall have a goodly reward, and easy will be his task as we order it by our command."	"But as for him who believeth and doeth right, good will be his reward, and We shall speak unto him a mild command."
18:89	Then followed he (another) way.	Then he followed a road
18:90	Until, when he came to the rising of the sun, he found it rising on a people for whom We had provided no covering protection against the sun.	Till, when he reached the rising-place of the sun, he found it rising on a people for whom We had appointed no shelter therefrom.
18:91	(He left them) as they were: We completely understood what was before him.	So (it was). And We knew all concerning him.
18:92	Then followed he (another) way.	Then he followed a road
18:93	Until, when he reached (a tract) between two mountains, he found, beneath them, a people who scarcely understood a word.	Till, when he came between the two mountains, he found upon their hither side a folk that scarce could understand a saying.
18:94	They said: "O Zul-qarnain! the Gog and Magog (people) do great mischief on earth: shall we then render thee tribute in order that thou mightest erect a barrier [wall] between us and them?"	They said: "O Dhu'l-Qarneyn! Lo! Gog and Magog are spoiling the land. So may we pay thee tribute on condition that thou set a barrier [wall] between us and them?"
18:95	He said: "(The power) in which my Lord has established me is better (than tribute): help me therefore with strength (and labour): I will erect a strong barrier [wall] between you and them:	He said: "That wherein my Lord hath established me is better (than your tribute). Do but help me with strength (of men), I will set between you and them a bank [wall]."
18:96	"Bring me blocks of iron." At length, when he had filled up the space between the two steep mountain sides, he said, "Blow (with your bellows)" then, when he had made it (red) as fire, he said: "Bring me, that I may pour over it, molten lead."	"Give me pieces of iron" - till, when he had leveled up (the gap) between the cliffs, he said: "Blow!" - till, when he had made it a fire, he said: "Bring me molten copper to pour thereon."
18:97	Thus were they made powerless to scale it or to dig through it.	And (Gog and Magog) were not able to surmount, nor could they pierce (it).
18:98	He said: "This is a mercy from my Lord: but when the promise of my Lord comes to pass, He will make it into dust; and the promise of my Lord is true."	He said: "This is a mercy from my Lord; but when the promise of my Lord cometh to pass, He will lay it low, for the promise of my Lord is true."
18:99	On that day We shall leave them [Gog and Magog] to surge like waves on one another: the trumpet will be blown, and We shall collect them all together.	And on that day we shall let some of them [Gog and Magog] surge against others, and the Trumpet will be blown. Then We shall gather them together in one gathering.

The Qur'anic version of the story then can be summarised as follows:
i.Muhammad is asked about someone called Zul-Qarnain
ii.God tells us he spoke to Z-Q, favouring him and enabling him to achieve his ends.
iii. God tells us Z-Q went west and reached the setting sun where he found a people.
iv. He then goes east and and discovers another people at the place where the sun rises. 
v. He sets off again until he discovers another people living in fear of two triibes called Gog and Magog beyond two mountains. 
vi. He erects a great wall made of iron and molten lead to protect them but says one day God will break it down.

Why should we then believe that Zul-Qarain is Alexander the Great, apart from the Islamic sources themselves which were unequivocal in their support of the belief?
Well, let me lay out just some of the plentiful evidence.
a. Zul-Qarain translates as Possesses Two Horns or The Two Horned One. Alexander was depicted with the horns of Ammon as a result of his conquest of ancient Egypt in 332 BC and was consequently known throughout the conquered world as The Two Horned One. Archaeologists have found a large number of different types of ancients coins depicting Alexander the Great with two horns. Indeed,  in the late 2nd century BC, silver coins depicting Alexander with ram horns were even used as a principal coinage in Arabia.
b. Ancient stories recount how Alexander built a great wall to keep out a people known as Gog and Magog:  "The building of gates in the Caucasus Mountains by Alexander to repel the barbarian peoples identified with Gog and Magog has ancient provenance and the wall is known as the Gates of Alexander or the Caspian Gates. The name Caspian Gates originally applied to the narrow region at the southeast corner of the Caspian Sea, through which Alexander actually marched in the pursuit of Bessus in 329 BC, although he did not stop to fortify it. It was transferred to the passes through the Caucasus, on the other side of the Caspian, by the more fanciful historians of Alexander." link . Gog and Magog have been associated with the Alexander legend since ancient times. In the Syriac Christian legends for example, Alexander the Great encloses the Gog and Magog horde behind a mighty gate between two mountains, preventing Gog and Magog from invading the Earth. In addition, it is written in the Christian legend that in the end times God will cause the Gate of Gog and Magog to be destroyed, allowing the Gog and Magog horde to ravage the Earth.
c. The story of Alexander travelling to the setting of the sun was well known and is even referred to by Ibn Kathir:  As for the idea of his reaching the place in the sky where the sun sets, this is something impossible, and the tales told by storytellers that he traveled so far to the west that the sun set behind him are not true at all. Most of these stories come from the myths of the People of the Book [Jews and Christians] and the fabrications and lies of their heretics. This suggests that  Ibn Kathir was aware of the Christian legends and thought they were referring to the same figure as the Zul-Qarnain mentioned in the Qur'an.

Given the remarkable similarities between the stories of Alexander and the episodes recounted in the Qur'an of Zul-Qarnain, the fact that Islamic theologians of ancient times identified them as one and the same man, and that Christian and Jewish stories also recount Alexander's exploits and refer to him as a holy man or even a saint, it seems utterly bizarre that Muslims should now try to deny the link.

So why should certain Muslims be so keen to do so?

Let's look at a typical site, Islamawareness.net. In an article entitled Why Zul Qarnain is not Alexander the author, a certain Khalid Jan, presents his "evidence". It can be summarised as follows: the Qur'an tells us that Zul-Qarain was a man beloved of God to whom God had extended special privileges and powers. Historical evidence, however, points indisputably to Alexander being a warlike, violent, pagan who worshiped pagan gods and who wanted to rule the world to gain riches.  (For completeness' sake we should note that Khalid fails to mention another reason why Muslims might be embarrassed to find God supposedly giving Alexander great powers: that of his well documented bi-sexuality and  long lasting love affair with Hephaestion )
Khalid concludes that it must therefore be impossible that the figure described in the Qur'an is Alexander.
Because the Qur'an can't be wrong.
That's it.

Generously, Khalid doesn't blame those who erroneously conflated the two figures because "academic and scientific knowledge was either limited or non-existent". (Unlike nowadays, eh Khalid?) He concludes:
The only common factor on which these scholars based their opinions is the expeditions carried by Alexander and Zul_Qarnain. Other than this, there are hardly any other characteristics that are common in both. The article thus dismisses the overwhelming evidence pointing to the figures being one and the same in a single line.

Hence we are left with a conundrum. Despite Islamawareness.net and others' attempts to convince us otherwise, it is as clear to modern readers as it was to the Islamic scholars that Zul-Qarain is Alexander the Great. It is also clear that Alexander was a pagan war-lord. Muslims cannot deny this since many of them, ironically, use the fact to "prove" that Zul-Qarain cannot be Alexander. 

How then can the Qur'an describe him as a God-fearing, Allah-worshipping, saintly individual to whom God actually spoke (usually a fool proof sign of a prophet, by the way)? 

Unless, that is, when Muhammad was asked by the Quraysh at the behest of some local rabbis what he knew about Zul-Qarnain, the "saintly" figure who conquered the ancient world, to test his prophet-hood, he simply recounted the relevant myths and legends that were common at the time (after taking fifteen days to do some research, of course.) How was he to know that many centuries later Alexander would be revealed as  a pagan who thought he was a god born of a god who was devoted to his male lover just to embarrass Muslim apologists and prove the Qur'an was written by a fallible human?

They (the rabbis) said, 'Ask him about three things which we will tell you to ask and if he answers them then he is a Prophet who has been sent (by Allah); if he does not, then he is saying things that are not true, in which case how you will deal with him will be up to you. Ask him about some young men in ancient times, what was their story? For theirs is a strange and wondrous tale. Ask him about a man who travelled a great deal and reached the east and the west of the earth. What was his story? And ask him about the Ruh (soul or spirit) —what is it? If he tells you about these things, then he is a Prophet, so follow him, but if he does not tell you, then he is a man who is making things up, so deal with him as you see fit.'(Tafsir Ibn Kathir)
The famous story in the Sira relates that when Muhammad was informed of the three questions from the Rabbis, he declared that he would have the answers in the morning. However, Muhammad did not give the answer in the morning. For fifteen days, Muhammad did not answer the question. Doubt in Muhammad began to grow amongst the people of Mecca. Then, after fifteen days, Muhammad received the revelation that is Sura Al-Kahf ("The Cave") link

Lies, manipulation and brainwashing - another day of dawah on the net

I recently posted a typical article from an Islamic site purporting to be nothing more than an attempt to reassure a Muslim who was having doubts about his faith. I accused the author of being less than honest with his readers and suggested this sort of insidious, mendacious propaganda was increasingly widespread on the net. Millions of people are being lied to on a daily basis in a blatant attempt to mislead and confuse.

Let me reiterate, ever since a close friend converted - apparently mainly because he had been convinced  (no doubt by some overtly devout b*gger who saw it as a chance of picking up extra points for more rewards in Paradise) that there were scientific miracles in the Qur'an - my gripe  has always been with those individuals who seek to lie to and manipulate others to either convert or keep them from questioning their faith.(If, however, you want to believe in any one of the pantheon of sky fairies we've invented for ourselves for purely spiritual reasons, and you leave the rest of us alone, then that's your affair and I have no right try to change your mind.)

Anyway, the article in question starts by dealing with the questioner's doubts regarding the incompatibility of a literal reading of the Qur'an with the Theory of Evolution.

You see they are supporters of Theory Of Evolution which is a baseless theory and Science itself doesn't approve (sic) it. They have not provided any evidences in support of Theory of Evolution, but they only say that "Holy Qur'an is incompatible with thesis of human evolution", Lolx this is no proof to say that Holy Qur'an has an error rather this theory is itself incompatible with science. There will be no Christianity, Judaism or Islam if you believe in Theory of Evolution. I think Atheists are the owners of this website.

Lie 1 - "Evolution is a baseless theory" . Nearly every scientific society, representing hundreds of thousands of scientists, have issued statements rejecting intelligent design and a petition supporting the teaching of evolutionary biology was endorsed by 72 US Nobel Prize winners. See here for further discussion.

Lie 2 - "This theory is incompatible with science". See above ditto  

Lie 3 - "There will be no Christianity or Judaism if you believe in the Theory of Evolution" The Catholic Church and Conservative and Reform Jews accept Evolution guided by God. Christianity and Judaism have survived the advent of the theory of evolution because their mainstream adherents don't require a literal reading of their texts.

It then proceeds to reassure the reader regarding the fundamental Qur'anic tenet that God creates humans from clay.

 I must tell you it (sic) not only Islam but Christianity and Judaism also tells (sic) us that Human Being are created from Clay or Dust mixed with water and you will find many explanation in support of this from Christians as well and today Science proves this

Lie 4 "Christianity and Judaisism also tell us that Human Beings are created from clay". Well, their holy books certainly say this, but I'm afraid most Christian and Jewish theologians are grown-ups and long ago stopped attempting to interpret their texts literally.
Lie 5 "Science proves" man is made from clay. See here for an explanation why this is, for want of a better word, bollocks.

From here the author attempts to deal with the apparently troublesome verse in the Qur'an which describes the sun setting in a muddy pool.

Point to be noted here is that Holy Qur'an clearly states from the perspective of Zul-qarnain, that what Zul-qarnain saw from him (sic) eyes. Likewise when we go to a beach and during the sun-set when we see the Sun it looks like that the Sun is setting into the Sea but we all know that Sun doesn't set in Sea but our eyes see that Sun is setting into the Sea.

Lie 6 - What the author fails to tell his reader here is that Zul-qarnain doesn't just see the sun setting in a muddy pool, but he actually finds a people living by the pool and is (bizarrely) requested by God to either punish them or treat them with kindness

They ask thee concerning Zul-qarnain. Say, "I will rehearse to you something of his story. Verily We established his power on earth, and We gave him the ways and the means to all ends. One (such) way he followed. Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it set in a spring of murky water: Near it he found a People: We said: "O Zul-qarnain! (thou hast authority,) either to punish them, or to treat them with kindness." 18:83-86.

It is thus less than honest to claim the Qur'anic verse is simply a turn of phrase, and draw an analogy with our experience of seeing the sun setting "in the sea". It becomes even clearer that we are expected to understand this literally when we read on, rather than taking the verses out of context:

Then followed he (another) way. Until, when he came to the rising of the sun, he found it rising on a people for whom We had provided no covering protection against the sun. 

How can we be sure the author of the Qur'an was not speaking figuratively? Because actually the whole section of the Qur'an dealing with of Zul-qarain (Alexander the Great) (18:83-97) is remarkably similar to a collection of legends about the exploits of Alexander circulating in the Middle East and Europe from the 3rd century BC, including finding a people by a muddy pond where the sun sets! This is something else the author of the article strangely fails to mention.

The article then deals with the old chestnut of Geo-centrism - the ancient belief that the Earth was the centre of the solar system which seems to be referred to in many verses of the Qur'an. The answer given is a classic...

If you read carefully they sub-consciously proved that Holy Qur'an is the word of God. Look they said "This is consistent with the beliefs that were prevalent prior to the 16th century that the Sun revolved around the Earth.", and we all know that Holy Qur'an was present 1400 years ago means 6th century so Holy Qur'an gave this information 10 centuries before which proves that Holy Qur'an is the word of God.

Not so much a lie as a willful misunderstanding of English: "prior to the 16th century" means any time before the 16th century. The Qur'an expresses beliefs that were common before the 16th century, before the discovery that the earth orbits the sun.

Secondly they said "but does not mention once that the Earth does too", I show you where Holy Qur'an says about the rotation of Earth even with the exact direction of rotation, Holy Qur’an says,And you see the mountains, thinking them rigid, while they will pass as the passing of clouds. [It is] the work of Allah , who perfected all things. Indeed, He is Acquainted with that which you do. (Holy Qur’an 27:88)The above verse emphasizes how the mountains and therefore the Earth itself moves in the same way that clouds do. The direction of movement of the main cloud masses that some 4000 meters high is always from West to East, this direction is the same as that in which the Earth rotates around its own axes, therefore it is miraculously revealed in the verse that the earth moves from West to East the same direction as followed by the clouds and this was revealed in Holy Qur’an 1400 years ago at a time when people didn’t believe that the earth was round, that it revolves around its own axes and that it travels from West to East. 

I have dealt with this ridiculous, deceitful misreading of this verse before. The verse has NOTHING to do with telling mankind that the Earth rotates instead of being stationary.
How can we be so sure? Because if we look at the verse which comes immediately before this one, we can understand better the intentions of the author.

And on that Day the trumpet [of judgment] will be sounded, and all [creatures] that are in the heavens and all that are on earth will be stricken with terror, except such as God wills [to exempt]: and in utter lowliness all will come unto Him. 27:87

From this it becomes clear that the author is detailing what will happen on Judgement Day (hence the reference to "trumpet [of Judgement]". On Judgement Day frightening things happen.. like the seas boiling, the heavens opening and ... mountains flying around like clouds.

Let me now give one final piece of advice in the vein of those dawah/miracle seeker sites. 

if you face problem in understanding the meaning then take help from Mufti, Imam, Hafeez, Qari....scientists and those who aren't terrified of upsetting their imaginary God. You will get satisfied and believe that Quran is true  the work of a human author and you will be released from the daily torment of worrying you might end up in Hell for an eternity.

  

 

Are you having doubts about Islam? Read on...

Q. Various non Muslims says that the Qur'an has many scientific errors and I began to have doubt can anyone help? 

A. Brother I have just visited your provided link and I can say with confidence that they have only quoted verses from Holy Qur'an and provided no evidences that Holy Qur'an is against proved science. I don't have that much time to answer all of this but I'll try to touch some major points. Their foolishness is clearly visible from the first para, they quoted
1. EvolutionThey state,
The Qur'an advocates creationism. It is incompatible with the thesis of human evolution from simpler life forms and natural selection. This is not very controversial as reliable statistics on the subject have shown most Muslims agree Islam and evolution are not compatible. (wikiislam.net)
Answer: You see they are supporters of Theory Of Evolution which is a baseless theory and Science itself doesn't approve it. They have not provided any evidences in support of Theory of Evolution, but they only say that "Holy Qur'an is incompatible with thesis of human evolution", Lolx this is no proof to say that Holy Qur'an has an error rather this theory is itself incompatible with science. There will be no Christianity, Judaism or Islam if you believe in Theory of Evolution. I think Atheists are the owners of this website.
2. Human created from clayThey state,
The scientific hypothesis postulates that clay merely 'match-makes' RNA and membrane vesicles - and therefore does not form a building block. This is contrary to the Islamic faith which postulates that human beings were created from clay, implying clay was a building block. (wikiislam.net)
Answer: Again a hypothesis with no references and half knowledge. I must tell you it not only Islam but Christianity and Judaism also tells us that Human Being are created from Clay or Dust mixed with water and you will find many explanation in support of this from Christians as well and today Science proves this, you can find a detail explanation on the following links
http://www.elnaggarzr.com/en/main.php?id=39Plus you can find what Christians say regarding man created from clay on the following link,
http://esoriano.wordpress.com/2007/05/25/from-dust-to-man-a-scientific-proof/3. The sun set into the murky waterThey state,
The Qur'an propagates the idea that the sun is smaller than the earth and assumes the sun goes to a black muddy pool. (wikiislam.net)
Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it set in a spring of murky water: Near it he found a People: We said: "O Zul-qarnain! (thou hast authority,) either to punish them, or to treat them with kindness." (Holy Qur'an 18:86)
Answer: Point to be noted here is that Holy Qur'an clearly states from the perspective of Zul-qarnain, that what Zul-qarnain saw from him eyes. Likewise when we go to a beach and during the sun-set when we see the Sun it looks like that the Sun is setting into the Sea but we all know that Sun doesn't set in Sea but our eyes see that Sun is setting into the Sea.
4. GeocentricismThey state,
The Qur'an mentions numerous times that the Sun and the Moon travel in an orbit, but does not mention once that the Earth does too. This is consistent with the beliefs that were prevalent prior to the 16th century that the Sun revolved around the Earth. (wikiislam.net)
And the Sun runs his course for a period determined for him: that is the decree of (Him) the Exalted in Might, the All-Knowing. (Holy Qur'an 36:38)
Answer: If you read carefully they sub-consciously proved that Holy Qur'an is the word of God. Look they said "This is consistent with the beliefs that were prevalent prior to the 16th century that the Sun revolved around the Earth.", and we all know that Holy Qur'an was present 1400 years ago means 6th century so Holy Qur'an gave this information 10 centuries before which proves that Holy Qur'an is the word of God. Secondly they said "but does not mention once that the Earth does too", I show you where Holy Qur'an says about the rotation of Earth even with the exact direction of rotation, Holy Qur’an says,
And you see the mountains, thinking them rigid, while they will pass as the passing of clouds. [It is] the work of Allah , who perfected all things. Indeed, He is Acquainted with that which you do. (Holy Qur’an 27:88)The above verse emphasizes how the mountains and therefore the Earth itself moves in the same way that clouds do. The direction of movement of the main cloud masses that some 4000 meters high is always from West to East, this direction is the same as that in which the Earth rotates around its own axes, therefore it is miraculously revealed in the verse that the earth moves from West to East the same direction as followed by the clouds and this was revealed in Holy Qur’an 1400 years ago at a time when people didn’t believe that the earth was round, that it revolves around its own axes and that it travels from West to East. Subhan Allah
Brother I would advice you to not doubt in Allah (S.W.T) and do not make these anti-islamic sites the source of your knowledge because they are astray and wanted to make Muslims go astray from the deen of Allah (S.W.T). Brother you should read Holy Qur'an with translation, listen/watch the audio/video Islamic Lectures and read Islamic Books.
There is no error in the Quran. And the site you describe doesn't represent the authentic site. What ever matter there given should be checked by you in the Quran and if you face problem in understanding the meaning then take help from Mufti, Imam, Hafeez, Qari.... You will get satified and believe that Quran is true, There is no error in it. AND DONT SEARCH THIS TYPES OF WEBSITE. SOME PROVIDE AUTHENTIC KNOWLEDGE BUT SOME CREATE CONFUSION AND MISLEAD PEOPLE AS THEY ARE MANAGED BY NON MUSLIMS
Bro go to islamic site instead of anti islamic site
wikiislam is an anti islamic site the try to humilate islam
but they can match our best religion

The above taken from a genuine Islamic site - www.islam.com. For the moment I'll just let you digest the implications of such overt brainwashing which is going on all over the internet.
Discussion to follow.

The Mystery of Mount Judi...again

Mount Judi

I get many comments telling me gleefully that I am going to burn in hell for an eternity. The irony of a merciful God torturing innocent people for the "sin" of not believing in Him being presumably so massive as to be invisible...

"What dog? Where?"

Here's one directed at atheists in general, but you get the picture

Atheists are unequivocally the STUPIDEST people on earth. Satan has you by your throats. I give you glad tidings of a burning fire whose fuel is men and stones and whose fire is 70 times the fire of this earth to burn in for eternity if you die as atheists.

This particular loon has attached his vitriolic bile to a video on a topic beloved of the miracle seekers: Noah's Ark and Mount Judi.

The Qur'an states that the resting place of Noah's Ark is not Mount Ararat as in the Bible, but Mount Judi. 

"And the word was spoken: "O earth! swallow up thy waters! And, O sky, cease [thy rain]!" And the water sank into the earth, and the will [of God] was done, and the ark came to rest on Mount Judi. And the word was spoken: "Away with these evil doing folk!" (Quran, 11:44)."

Miracle seekers such as the one who posted the video above (viewed over a million times) are spreading the lie that there is archaeological evidence of a large boat on top of this mountain.

There is no such evidence. What there is is a striking natural rock formation in the shape of a boat. One can easily understand how ancient peoples (before the advent of modern geological knowledge and computer-aided surveying techniques) might have interpreted the structure as the remains of an ancient vessel. However, geologists have studied the site and concluded that it is entirely natural. Here is the introduction to a study of the site by Lorence Gene Collins (Department of Geological Sciences,  California State University, Northridge, California)  

A natural rock structure near Dogubayazit, Turkey, has been misidentified as Noah's Ark. Microscopic studies of a supposed iron bracket show that it is derived from weathered volcanic minerals. Supposed metal-braced walls are natural concentrations of limonite and magnetite in steeply inclined sedimentary layers in the limbs of a doubly plunging syncline. Supposed fossilized gopherwood bark is crinkled metamorphosed peridotite. Fossiliferous limestone, interpreted as cross cutting the syncline, preclude the structure from being Noah's Ark because these supposed "Flood" deposits are younger than the "Ark." Anchor stones at Kazan (Arzap) are derived from local andesite and not from Mesopotamia.

And here is the conclusion:

On the basis of the information given above, I suggest the following geologic history for the origin of the structure. Rocks in the supposed Ark, which now conform to the U-shape of the syncline, were deposited initially in a horizontal or near-horizontal position. These rocks were composed of tiny grains of clay, quartz, calcite, anthophyllite, and local concentrations of ilmenitic magnetite as well as poorly sorted pebbles of andesite and basalt. They were products of weathering and erosion of volcanic rocks in nearby mountains and were transported by streams and deposited in a basin. Subsequently, these layers were compacted into rock and folded into a doubly plunging syncline. A marine sea advanced over the folded rocks and eroded and cut a channel in which fossiliferous limestone was later deposited. This was followed by uplift and further erosion that removed most of the limestone and scoured the fold to create the boat-shaped profile. Finally, swelling clays (bentonite) in mud in surrounding mountains caused a large landslide to occur. This landslide carried disoriented blocks of rock and mud that were channeled around the synclinal structure (Figure 5). Some time early in this history, following uplift, the limonite concretions ("iron brackets") were formed in the sediments, both inside and outside the synclinal structure, as ground water from rain and melting snow reacted with ilmenitic magnetite (and pyrite) granules along bedding planes and fracture zones.

Evidence from microscopic studies and photo analyses demonstrates that the supposed Ark near Dogubayazit is a completely natural rock formation. It cannot have been Noah's Ark nor even a man-made model. It is understandable why early investigators falsely identified it. The unusual boat-shaped structure would so catch their attention that an eagerness to be persons who either discovered Noah's Ark or confirmed its existence would tend to override caution. 

As I've posited before in previous posts, the expert view that the structure on Mount Judi is an entirely natural and completely understandable structure easily explained by geologists should provoke some interesting questions among those who believe in the literal truth of the myth of Noah.

i. Doesn't the astounding coincidence that there is a striking ancient natural rock formation in the shape of a boat on the very mountain where Muhammad said Noah's Ark came to rest cause you to wonder if Muhammad might have known about the site? It's not even as if the miracle seekers can claim no-one knew about the site at the time of Muhammad.
Here's what Bill Crouse in Archaeology and Biblical Research,Noah's Ark: Its Final Berth Vol. 5, No. 3. Summer, 1992 has to say about it:

Cudi Dagh overlooks the all-important Mesopotamian plain and is notable for its many archaeological ruins in and around the mountain. There are also many references to it in ancient history.₁₃ Sennacherib (700 B.C.), the Assyrian king, carved rock reliefs of himself on the side of the mountain (see photo #2).₁₄ The Nestorians (a sect of Christianity) built several monasteries around the mountain including one on the summit called "The Cloister of the Ark". It was destroyed by lightning in 766 A.D.

He goes on to note how well-known the structure still is locally:

The Muslims later built a mosque on the site. In 1910, Gertrude Bell explored the area and found a stone structure still at the summit with the shape of a ship (see photo #3) called by the locals "Sefinet Nebi Nuh" "The Ship of Noah". 

(How strange then that modern miracle seekers seem to be under the impression that this site has just been discovered and thus miraculously confirms the Qur'an...)

We thus have a remarkable natural rock formation familiar to the local inhabitants from well before Muhammad's time and mistakenly identified by them as Noah's Ark appearing in the Qur'an. Hmmm.

ii. Let's for one moment assume the geologists are all mistaken and that the strange rock formation is a miraculously preserved outline of the Ark of Noah. We now have to believe that the ark came to rest after the local flood on a mountain over 7,000 feet tall. 
So flood water was at least 7,000 feet deep but the flood was local? Really?Once more I simply ask why it is that so many people seem to lose the ability to think logically and rationally when it comes to religion. 

Perhaps I know the answer already...as a comment on a previous post said so chillingly:

 Allah Almighty has revealed in the Holy Quran that Noah's Ark rested on Mount Judi So that is the fact. THe Quran can never ever be wrong as it is word of Allah, the omnipotent.

It's a fact. No point in researching or thinking for yourselves.