Jump to content
Islamic Forum

The Doc

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


The Doc last won the day on March 24 2015

The Doc had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

31 Excellent

About The Doc

  • Rank
    Full Member

Previous Fields

  • Marital Status
  • Religion

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    On an expanding Universe..
  • Interests
    Philosophy, football, boxing, ancient history and cooking.
  1. Darwinism Refuted

    Science changes as you know- it is not always and never can be 100% Many things we believed before were put to bed once newer scientific investigations proved otherwise- that's the beauty of science but at the sametime, it shows its limitations. We don't use science as a method to ascertain all truths- in our lives and daily going on. But what scientists do is have different principles in using a ‘definition’ for their ideas. Basically when something is highly likely or may be even extremely likely, they will call it… wait for it: a FACT!!… not highly likely theory, but a fact. so even if evolution is not actually a FACT, but rather just a theory, they still call it a FACT. The reason why they consider ‘highly likely’ to be similar to fact is that they simply assume that after many many many … experiments, if the result is still the same therefore it must be the same across the board. So, they were able to prove evolution on so many species, so therefore it must be true for any NEXT species they will study, even if they actually haven’t studied it or were unable to. For humans, they have not been able to specifically prove it using physical proof and tests, rather they just deducted it in this manner. So Islam doesn’t deny evolution for all the million of species but rather only affirms that Adam was created differently. That’s it. Reality is: Millions of species that exist could come from evolution. but it doesn’t prove that humans did too. Science will always be behind and flawed if scientist do not adopt more realistic principles rather than a process of deduction… after all how can they study every single animal that ever exist?… actually we only know less than 10% of all animals that are on this planet, we are still discovering new ones every day. It makes it even more ludicrous to adopt such a process of deduction and include every species under its umbrella!
  2. Darwinism Refuted

    Olaf The Conflict Between Religion and Science, (by William Draper) mentions how people belonging to the Islamic faith already knew about evolution. In fact it is refered to as 'the Muhammaden theory of the evolution of man from lower forms”. Denying evolution not only puts Muslims out of touch with established science, it puts them out of touch with their own scientific heritage. Islam has a rich scientific history- you can simply google this yourself and establish. Ibn Khaldun, perhaps one of the most famous Muslim Polymaths of all time, published a book called 'The Muqadimmah' in 1377 CE. In it he states: He adds:
  3. As usual, emotive and psychological issues raised.
  4. Best Age To Perform Umrah

    Depends on the individual. If they are mature and have strong iman, then performing Umrah can be done pretty much from teenage years. Personally me and my wife did it few years back now but I was 33. As for Hajj, I think that takes alot more- one has to be mentally strong and I personally always felt that if I did it in my 'younger days' I may still not have the fulfilment it ought to bring (what with worldly challenges etc). I have not done hajj to this day but it's more now due to the financial costs involved. If Allah wills, I will love (and pray) I do it whilst still sound of mind and body. I would also want to do this journey with my wife.
  5. Andalusi- although I admire your endurance in all this 'scientific' way to the Quran...it is not the way to propogate the message of the book. The Quran was never (and isn't) a scientific book- it is a book of signs, yes. You have to understand that science changes- and also that many claims that can be made in the Quran predated Islam. In some cases Itit's become an intellectual embarrassment for Muslim apologists and exposes the weakness of the argument. The miracle of the Quran was never about the matters you raise- the claims of science that can be correlated with the Quran. In fact many Muslims who converted to Islam due to the scientific miracles narrative, have left the religion due to encountering opposing arguments. Hence why this approach is never the way of how to convery the message of Islam or its book. The fallacy of the undistributed middle has already been raised on here- but to fit it in with how its being used as a Quranic argument goes like this: The scientific fact in embryology is the implantation of the blastocyst in the uterine wall. Implantation can be attributed as a safe place. The Qur’ān uses the words qarārin, makīn, which can mean a safe place. Therefore, the Qur’ān is describing the scientific fact of the implantation of the blastocyst. It doesn’t follow that the words qarārin makīn (a safe place) imply the process of implantation just because it to shares the attribute of a safe place. The argument will only be valid if all descriptions of qarārin makīn refers to, and describes, the process of implantation. Since qarārin makīn can also refer to the womb, which was the 7th century understanding of the words, then the argument is invalid. The mere correlation between a Qur’ānic word and a scientific process or description does not ascertain the intended meaning of the verse. Any person who understand the Arabic language knows there are layers and layers of meanings and we cannot apply this to 'science' just because it kind of fits. The scientific miracles claim would only be valid if it could be demonstrated that the interpretations of the words that seem to correlate with science are the intended meanings. The principles of Qur’ānic exegesis dictates that this is impossible to ascertain. Another way this argument of the Quran being miraculous on the scientific field, is that Muhammad (PBUH) did not have knowledge of the matters. It would go something like this: 1)The knowledge implied by the Qur’ānic verses was not available or discovered at the time of revelation (7th Century) 2)The Prophet Muhammad (upon whom be peace) could not have had access to the knowledge implied by the Qur’ānic verses. However when we recall history, we see this is not entirely true. To pick an example, lets look at the information about iron (as mentioned in the Quran). We know it has been refered to as being 'sent down' and many apologists use this as The Sending Down of Iron “Miracle” However, the Ancient Egyptians 1400 years before the Prophet-hood of Muhammad (PBUH) referred to iron as ba-en-pet meaning “Iron from heaven.” The Assyrians and Babylonians also had similar concepts for iron. Another example is the The Moon Being a Borrowed Light “Miracle”. The claim used by apologists is that no one knew that the moon did not omit its own ligt-but borrowed it from the sun. In light of history this is not true, at around 500BC, 1200 years before the Qur’ānic revelation, Thales said: ”The moon is lighted from the sun.” Anaxagoras, in 400-500BC asserted that: ”The moon does not have its own light, but light from the sun.” There are numerous other examples but it would take up far too much details and space to jot it all down on here. To claim that there is anything scientifically miraculous about a particular Qur’ānic verse is incoherent. This is because science can change due to new observations and studies. Therefore, for someone to claim that a particular verse is miraculous would mean that the one making the claim can guarantee that the science will never change. To make such a guarantee would imply gross ignorance. Ignorance of the fact that science does change and is tentative due to the problems faced by induction and empiricism. This leads to the other point that science itself is not the only way to discover facts/truth. The assumption behind the scientific miracles narrative is that science is the only way or method to render truths about the world and reality. This assertion is known as scientism. To put it simply,scientism claims that a statement is not true if it cannot be scientifically proven. In other words if something cannot be shown to be true via the scientific method, then it is false. There are a few problems with scientism, for instance: 1. Scientism is self-defeating. Scientism claims that a proposition is not true if it cannot be scientifically proven. But the proposition itself cannot be scientifically proven! It is like saying “there are no sentences in the English language longer than three words” or “I cannot speak one word of English”. 2. Scientism cannot prove necessary truths like mathematics and logic. For example, If P, then Q. P. Therefore, Q and 3 + 3 = 6 are necessary truths and not merely empirical generalisations. 3. Scientism cannot prove moral and aesthetic truths. For example love, beauty, right and wrong. 4. Science cannot prove other sources of knowledge. For example justified beliefs via ‘authentic testimony’. A major problem with scientism is that truths can be established outside the scientific paradigm. To conclude , some verses in the Qur’ānic discourse are currently “unscientific”. This does not mean the Qur’ān is wrong or not from the Divine , rather it can show that our scientific knowledge is limited and has not reached the right conclusions yet. Our focus should be on the linguistic miracle of the QURAN. Remember this is a book challenging the people to produce a book like it- at a time when the best of Arab poets lived in the 7th century.
  6. Facts About Prophecy And The Message

    Oh dear. Are we going to run by a DM article now and consider it factual. Actually, going up one level to the Times article (cannot link properly as it has a firewall) they also covered this 'breaking story'. The article by Oliver Moody starts off with this: Hmmm..who are these historians. Let's take a closer look shall we? The Times article mentions two. The first is Tom Holland – who presented a laughably poor documentary about the early history of Islam on Channel Four a few years ago and whose accompanying book In The Shadow Of The Sword which contained schoolboy errors about the Qur’an. After a big build up in his book which began by seeking the “solid bedrock” on which Islam is founded, he admitted – over 300 pages into his book, that: “ (p310) The second historian is second is Keith Small, whom the Times describes as a “Koranic manuscript consultant at the University of Oxford’s Bodleian Library”. This is true, but The Times omits his other title. Dr Small also happens to be on the staff of the Oxford Centre for Christian Apologetics. Nevermind. So, what is the evidence behind the claim that the Birmingham University “parchment appears to be so old that it contradicts most accounts of the Prophet’s life and legacy” that they have uncovered. Well, it turns out that these two “historians” have not uncovered anything new whatsoever! As Birmingham University pointed out last month, the fragments have been carbon dated with a 95% probability to the period 568 to 645 CE ie. to a period that very closely corresponds to the time (610 – 632 CE) when the traditional Muslim narrative maintains that the Prophet Muhammad received the revelation of the Qur’an. The straw the two historians appear to clutch at is that the earliest date in that range (568 CE) is just before the Prophet Muhammad was said to have been born (circa 570 CE). However, carbon dating is not an exact science which is why a range of dates is almost always presented by scientists when using the method to date objects. Secondly, the dating is of the parchment not the actual text of the Qur’an it contains. The parchment is logically bound to have been produced prior to the ink being written on it. So, the story is really a non-story. Indeed, compare what the sensationalised and badly-evidenced Times story says with what the actual academics who researched the Birmingham University fragments say: “The tests carried out on the parchment of the Birmingham folios yield the strong probability that the animal from which it was taken was alive during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad or shortly afterwards. This means that the parts of the Qur’an that are written on this parchment can, with a degree of confidence, be dated to less than two decades after Muhammad’s death. These portions must have been in a form that is very close to the form of the Qur’an read today, supporting the view that the text has undergone little or no alteration and that it can be dated to a point very close to the time it was believed to be revealed.” So nothing to see here folks..please move along :D
  7. Muslim-Christian Debate, Here

    Yes the Muslim greeting is Asalaam Alaykum (peace be upon you). Key similarities in terms of the faiths, then I would list as: -There is only one God. He is the Creator and Sustainer of the universe. - God sent prophets such as Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, Joseph, John the Baptist, Jesus, (as Muslims we do not take Jesus as no more than a righteous/ beloved Messenger of God and Prophet). - People should follow the Ten Commandments and the moral teachings of the prophets. - Mary the mother of Jesus- she was a virgin; therefore Jesus was born miraculously. - Jesus Christ is the Messiah and he performed miracles. - The Old testament/Torah and the new testament/Gospel) are holy scriptures. - Satan is evil; therefore, people should not follow Satan. - An Anti-Christ will appear on Earth before the Day of Judgment. - Jesus Christ will return by descending from Heaven - The Day of Judgment will occur and people will be judged. - There is hell and paradise.
  8. Off Limits Ideas?

  9. Al Shabab Attack On University

    You both seem to be batting for the same side and missed the ball... No one said it had anything to do with OIL- i.e. the killings etc. It was mentioned that why no foreign forces have played the 'heroes' and come to rid Boko Haram/Al Shabab etc from their mindless oppression.. and it may well be that once the riches of Somalia oil is in full swing.. we may then see the true colours.
  10. Al Shabab Attack On University

    Actually Somalia's history of oil exploration dates back several decades- you should be able to find information about this via a good search. No doubt oil is something back on the agenda in this region- as Somalia’s geological formation bears important parallels to that of Yemen, which holds some 9 billion barrels of proven oil reserves. So I agree with Dot- plenty of stuff to raise eyebrows when forces don't act and wait for the right moment- it is well predicted Somalia may indeed be the next oil boom.
  11. Off Limits Ideas?

    Russell That all sounded like a ramble- doesn't illustrate what you're trying to say at all and I think my point was valid. We can all testify to taking information from news and people that can be described as testimony- it does not always mean one has to have physical evidence.
  12. Off Limits Ideas?

    Russell There should not be any argument that Muhammad was no more than a man, the Qur'an even testifies to this: Say (O Muhammad ﷺ): I am only a man like you. It has been revealed to me that yourIlaah (God) is One Ilaah (God – i.e. Allaah). [18:110] Anyone or group suggesting he was more than a man needs to prove this. Also, whilst on this topic, I have met many atheists and to date, none have questioned whether Muhammad existed- the historical evidence for this (from historians alone) is enough and his lineage etc. But let me ask you- do you only believe in things you can see or do you trust people what they tell you- especially the strength of testimonials- isn't this how we know most of our history? I mean, if I asked you the following: Is there any proof or valid evidence that Napoleon ever existed? - Is there really an Island called Fiji? - How do you know that your parents are your real parents? yes- I mean that. What proof do you have? did you witness your birth? If it was recorded on camcorder- how do you know it was you that was born? Do you have proof your birth certificate is 100% genuine and not false? I can even ask can you prove Isaac Newton existed? You know through frequent news. Frequent news is by definition news that has been relayed by an amount of people that normally do not concur on lying. The amount of people is variable but it is what cannot collaborate on fabricating a lie. In Islam, narrations like this are called Muttawatir- it is how information about Muhammad/the deen has been passed down. Frequent News- It is how we know most of our history. It is how we know that there is an Island called Fiji that although most of us have not seen it with your own eyes and never set foot on it, but since many people told you about it, all who could not have collaborated on generated this one big lie, we believe that Fiji exists. If one does believe that Napoleon existed, if one believes there is an Island called Fiji then why doesn't he believe in Muhammad? Peace
  13. It isn't and the fact it happened has nothing to do with any link to Islam. The perpetrators used machetes(?) they could have used knives or even spears-or even uzi machine guns- doesn't change the fact this person was killed unlawfully and as Dot laid out, this type of thing has no grounding in Islam.
  14. Christianity is not simply based on Jesus dying on the cross, but is also connected to the resurrection- this is not taught in anyway or mentioned by the Quran. Paul himself explicitly said that if Jesus did not rise from the dead then Christianity is false, and the beliefs of Christians has all been in vain: "And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept."--1 Corinthians. 15:17-20 So a Christian is one who has to believe in Jesus (AS) dying and being resurrected-if you deny one then you are simply not a Christian. The Quran which is the last revealed book sent, did not teach Christianity as we know it today, to believe in Christ's death/resuurection, died for your sins etc. This was mainly taught by Paul who led people astray from Jesus true message.
  15. What Is Jizya

    October- I don't know if you are for truely seeking answers or just popping up now and again to fuel the fire that already burns inside you my friend. I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt here- and only once, shed some more light on this point you raise (then from here on I won't indulge in further communication because if you are genuine, you can seek answers from reputable Muslim websites or ask someone on here). Presumably you are picking out the verse 9:29. Firstly PLEASE do not look at ISIS as some form of governemnt Muslim state abiding by the Qu'ran and authentic sunnah (sayings/actions) of the Prophet. They clearly are not! The acts of ISIS far exceed the limits and their transgression itself would result in their execution under a proper Islamic State. I could spend 2-3 pages detailing the conditions of war and how Muslims are advised to avoid killing non combats/women & children/destroying harvest/destroying property- but again, a good search may help you find the answers you seek- God willing. As for your point, the verse itself needs to be seen in its full context. It is common for non Muslim, especially those with an agenda to misrepresent this verse- some people have falsely concluded from verse 9:29, that Muslims are commanded to attack all non-Muslims until they pay money. Such an interpretation is completely false and contradicts authentic Islamic teachings. Shaykh Jalal Abualrub writes What this shows is the true nature of what an IS should be like- there is no compulsion in religion (as Quran states). The verse 9:29 particularly refers to the Roman Empire who waged war against Muhammad and his followers- it was a pre planned attack. What do you think they should do in this case, sit back and get slaughtered? If I knew a few people were heading to my house to attack me and my family- do you think I will sit back and chill? NO! The verse refers to the historical context in which the Prophet Muhammad fought against other nations. The Prophet Muhammad did not initiate agression against anyone, rather he and his followers were under attack from all who sought to crush the new Islamic state. The jizya is something that was profound in the early years of Islam but it was not a burden, not imposed on poor,young, sick,aged people- in fact, the Muslims had to pay much more under the zakat system! The one who paid jizya was protected, was exempt from military action- it was nothing more than a small tax levied under the Islamic Sate- just as you pay tax today (as I do) to the government. The concept is similar to income tax and corporate tax levied on expats living in foreign countries. You are paying tax to the state government to provide you with benefits and social services etc. This service is provided to all citizens regardless of race, religion, ethnicity etc. Now just as in the western world we have people complaining about immigrants not paying taxes or dishonest people evading taxes(you read something like this everyday) but benefitting from government services; if the non-zakaat paying people are left to benefit from state for free, we would have a situation similar to the right wing anti immigration lobby who would want these people out! It makes sense to ask them to contribute to state coffers. This contribution is in form of jizya. It's funny that attackers of this Jizya are quite okay with the tax system in their home country, but want to paint a draconian picture of a (non existent) ideal Islamic state. :mellow: