Hello, I wanted to present the strongest purely scientific and historic evidences for islam, they're not a definitive proof, if they were we would hear scientists and historians converting all the time. I'll also show aother few embryological passages from the Qur'an and Hadiths that I'm near certain that they are scientific errors simply, I already asked 2 people about some of these errors and they responded that they're indeed errors, but I wanted more testimonies preferably from people knowledgeable about developmental biology. I'm doing this because I think objectively islam has wayyy less scientific mistakes than the bible for example. Lots of anti-islam people might say the Qur'an says earth is flat citing some verses like "'And Allah has made the earth for you as a carpet (spread out), [71:19], but the word for "the earth" can mean: "the ground, as meaning the surface of the earth, on which we tread and fit and lie". according to Lane's Lexicon Volume 1, p. 48 There's many others such cases, since I used to be devoutly religious I can say I devoted a lot of time studying such islamic texts that talk about scientific and historic things, and I've found that almost all of them hold true today. My goal in this thread was to get people enlightened about the strongest of them, and knowledgeable people to confirm the errors in contrast of some strong alleged miracles in favor of islam. In other words, this is an objective study to judge this religion based on its ability to make factual claims. If the claimed facts turn out to be false, then the religion is false. Strong alleged evidences for Islam: 1- The name Haman is mentioned 6 times in the Qur'an in verses [28:6], [28:8], [28:38], [29:39], [40:24] and [40,36]. The Qur’an records Pharaoh having ordered a man entitled ‘Haman’ to bake bricks for construction. "Pharaoh said: "O Chiefs! no god do I know for you but myself: therefore, O Haman! light me a (kiln to bake bricks) out of clay, and build me a lofty palace, that I may mount up to the god of Moses: but as far as I am concerned, I think (Moses) is a liar!" Abdullah Yusuf Ali's Translation, The Meaning of The Holy Qur'an [28:38] According to: W. Wreszinski, Aegyptische Inschriften Aus Dem K.K. Hof Museum In Wien, 1906, J. C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung: Leipzig, I 34, p. 130. Scan Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! is the name of the person, transcribed as ḥmn-ḥ by Ranke. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! the profession of this person hmn-h(?) in German reads “Vorsteherder Steinbruch arbeiter”, I think it best translates to “the chief/overseer of quarrymen” But there is another part, in the middle of the inscription, that was not translated by Wreszinski. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! It means “of Amun”. Wreszinski probably left that middle part without translation since anyone in the field would know these signs. So muslims would claim a miracle like this: “All of which leads us to question how the author of the Qur’an knew to entitle the man in charge of construction supplies ‘Haman.’ With the language of the hieroglyphics dead and gone for over 500 years, and such titles presumably extinct as well, what was the source of such knowledge in Muhammad’s day?” [God'ed p. 70] However the egyptian names are written without vowels, what we find in Ranke's Dictionary is that his name is ḥmn-ḥ The following should explain “The Egyptian hieroglyphs disregard the vowels. In other words, with this system one arrives at words that are connected by vowels. For example, let us take the word "beautiful". Its transcription in the Egyptian hieroglyphics is nfr. To ease the pronunciation of these three consonants, they are bound together with "e-sounds", which leads to nefer. This pronunciation bears no relation with the original pronunciation of the Egyptian language. It is solely a convention to enable communication among the modern scholars or even commonfolk interested in ancient Egyptians hieroglyphs. It is not surprising that the scholarly pronunciation of Egyptian hieroglyphs (even consonants!) also differs.” “Although it is true that (in many cases) we do not know which vowels should be inserted between those consonants, this also means that the insertion of the vowel “a” is just as arbitrary as the insertion of the vowel “e”. The hieroglyphic name transliterated as “hmn” is usually pronounced “Hemen” in academic communication.” The fact is Ranke writes in his dictionary about that name (ḥmn-ḥ) Die ägyptischen Personennamen. Bd. I, p. 240 available online ob abgekürzt für ḥmn-ḥtp(.w) ? which means “whether abbreviated for ḥmn-ḥtp(.w) ?” Ranke says that the hieroglyphic signs which are transliterated as hmn-h are an abbreviation for another name, and, although he is apparently not fully certain, most likely they stand for hmn-htp(.w), i.e. the name that is listed in the next entry, No. 26. In fact, another egyptologist holds this view in an article which happens to only be available in german too “Dr. Katharina Stegbauer vom ägyptologischen Institut der Universität Leipzig stimmt dem zu: „Der komplette Name für das Kürzel lautet Hemen-hetep.” Google Translates it as “Dr. Catherine Stegbauer true Egyptological Institute of the University of Leipzig to the: "The complete name for the shortcut is Hemen-hetep.” Also this is said on the article “„Altägyptische Hieroglyphen bestehen aus Konsonantenlauten. Die Vokalisation ist unklar“, erläutert der Berliner Ägyptologe Professor Dr. Jürgen Osing. Somit könne selbst in der Theorie der Name „Haman“ in dieser Form gar nicht gesichert werden, sondern allenfalls ein „Hmn“. „Doch auf dem Pfosten befindet sich nicht einmal der Name `Hmn´, sondern `Hmn-h´“, so Osing.” Which basically means that the name could actually be Haman in theory if the transcription was ḥmn not ḥmn-ḥ This should totally eliminate this alleged divine knowledge, but actually I had one idea that I know no muslim apologetic on the internet used and wasn't said on the internet anywhere, I'm not making the case to argue for islam, I'm just sharing what is objectively true. First, arabic can't have 3 vowelless consonants consecutively unlike for example ‘bench’ or ‘tanks’ in english, I don’t have a source for this but it’s very apparent for anyone learned in arabic. also the 3 arabic long vowels count as such consonant. Only the imported words in modern arabic can have 3 vowelless consecutive consonants or a long vowel followed by 2 vowelless consonants like ‘mAtch’ Note: I'm treating 'A' as a long vowel of 'a' The thing is both ‘A’s in Haman’s arabic name in the Qur’an are long vowels, so it’s pronounced ‘hAmAn’, it’s hypothetically possible that ḥmn-ḥ in Ranke’s dictionary could be pronounced HAmAnH, or HamAnH. And in the arabicization of the name, the divine wrote it as ‘hAmAn’ because classical arabic never had and wouldn’t allow 2 vowelless consonants after a long vowel ‘A’, so hypothetically god removed the final 'h' of HAmAnh Egyptian names can have 4 consecutive vowelless consonants like Panhsj Still The objections for this claim are as follows: ḥmn-ḥ could be an abreviation of Hemen-hetep, this translates as Hemen is satisfied or merciful, where Hemen is an Egyptian deity "The Chief of the workers in the stone-quarries", hmm. Actually Bucaille missed out the last 2 words of his title; it's actually "Chief of the workers in the stone-quarries of Amun" - http://www.answering-islam.org/autho.../bucaille.html), so it doesn't sound like he was chief at all quarries. Also the Qur'an verse talks about baking bricks out of clay. Mud/clay bricks with straw were baked, but stone? The haman on the doorpost (not stela) inscription was involved with quarried stone, but it says nothing about clay. It is also a stretch to assume that this person in charge of some quarry workers was also Pharoah's chief architect. But still this is definitely a big thing because: How can someone entitled ‘A chief of stone-quarries of Amun’ be the egyptian deity Hemen-hetep? ‘A chief of stone-quarries’ could just as well build using baked clay bricks I guess ‘A chief of stone-quarries of Amun’, ‘of Amun’ doesn’t necessarily imply that he was the chief of masons working at the temples of Amun, it could be some kind of metaphor if Amun was a prominent god at the time. Why didn’t the transcription say something like ‘of the temples of Amun’ then? Even if it meant so, that’s a high post, so maybe the Pharaoh could order him for something different a few times. For the record Pharaoh is recorded in the Qur'an saying he's god. We’d need a deepy analyse from egyptologists and historians to clarify this. Most importantly of all, this is definitely a big thing to have this name in the Qur’an, how many names in Ranke’s Dictionary are entitled ‘A chief of masons’, how many of them start with the consonants ḥmn, just like the name hAmAn in the Qur’an? And I showed that the last ‘ḥ’ in ḥmn-ḥ could have been vowelless and removed in the arabicization of the name. How could Muhammad have gotten such a name or randomly choosed it out of a 1000? Some info about this: * Haman is mentioned in the Book of Esther part of the Christian Old Testament * “Zum Sprachlichen möchte ich noch einmal betonen, dass der Name Haman sowohl im Arabischen wie im Hebräischen etymologisch isoliert ist und dies auch in jeder weiteren semitischen Sprache wäre, da es hier weder einen Wortstamm *hmn noch einen solchen Wortbildungstypen gibt. Als ägyptischer Name wäre Haman zumindest sehr ungewöhnlich und bislang gänzlich unbekannt.” From http://www.islaminstitut.de/Artikelanzeige.41 M5fff2d8c174.0.html Which basically means the name Haman is not in any semitic language, because there’s no root for such word formations. As an arab speaker I can say the 3 consonants hmn don’t form a root word in arabic, all arabic words and names are derived from roots. But this doesn’t show us anything about whether Muhammad could have known wether Haman or HamAnh names were used in ancient egypt, is there even a chance that he could’ve known it? Did he just luckily choose it out of 1000 names because he was inspired when reading the book eshter? For the record, some authentic Hadiths in Musnad Ahmad record the Prophet saying that the Pharaoh’s Wife is called ‘Asseya’ which means “Someone (female) who gives medicine” and her father is called ‘Muzaħem’ which means “a rival or a competitor”, none of the wives of Merneptah and Ramses II the 2 hypothesized pharaohs by muslims are called ‘Asseya’ or even have her name’s meaning. 2- The Amount of Rain that falls Every Year is the Same From http://shaikhalbaani.wordpress.com/2011/05/25/the-amount-of-rain-that-falls-every-year-is-the-same/ From Ibn Abbaas who said, “‘No year has more rain than another, but Allaah distributes it between His Creation wherever He wishes.’ Then he recited, “And We have distributed it amongst them, in order that they may remember [the Grace of Allaah] …”” Shaikh al-Albaani said, “So it is apparent from what has preceded that even if the hadith is mawquf it has the ruling of being marfoo – because such a thing cannot be said based upon opinion and ijtihaad, and because it has been reported in marfoo form [in another narration].” mawquf means the chain of narrators reaches a companion of the prophet, marfoo means the chain of narrators actually reach the prophet himself (who is to be believed for everything he says) Except for incoming comets containing water, the Earth is kind of a closed system. Water that is evaporated must come down as rain. Could a 7th century arabian have known that or did he just guess it? I'd hope someone knows a clever observation possibility rather than just a lucky guess because I believe islam only has a few scientific errors at best. 3- God said in the Quran about one of the evil unbelievers who forbade the Prophet Muhammad from praying at the Ka'bah (Holy Mosque): “Let him beware! If he does not desist, We will drag him by the naa-se-yah, a lying, sinful naa-se-ya-tin!” [96:15-16] The word ‘naa-se-yah’ (or ‘naa-se-ya-tin’ -- different pronunciations of the same word), while often translated as ‘forelock,’ in fact deserves the longer and more accurate description of “fore part of the head.” [miracle claim] Why did the Quran describe the front of the head as being lying and sinful? Why didn't the Quran say that the person was lying and sinful? What is the relationship between the front of the head and lying and sinfulness? If we look into the skull at the front of the head, we will find the prefrontal area of the cerebrum, in the area we call the forehead. What does physiology tell us about the function of this area? A book entitled Essentials of Anatomy & Physiology says about this area, “The motivation and the foresight to plan and initiate movements occur in the anterior portion of the frontal lobes, the prefrontal area.” [Essentials of Anatomy and Physiology. 2nd edition. St. Louis: MosbyYear Book, Inc. p. 211.] Also the book says, "In relation to its involvement in motivation, the prefrontal area is also thought to be the functional center for aggression..." [/miracle claim] I think I have the answer for this. In the past muslims always understood it as the following and no one claimed or predicted the prefrontal part of the brain has anything to do with lying. From Tafsir al-Jalalayn (An exegesis of the Qur'an) "a lying, iniquitous forelock! (nāsiyatin: an indefinite noun substituting for a definite) — the description of this [forelock] in such terms is meant figuratively, and what is actually meant is that individual." It maybe a stretch to link the 'fore part of the head' to the prefrontal cortex, what about the frontal bones that protect the brain, or the frontal skin of the head? It's normal to have written the verse like this because for example of many of the descriptions that they could atribute to the 'evil unbeliever' like (mischievous, cunning, oppressor, etc...), only the word for lying "kaa-ze-ba" best fits the rhythmical pattern well for a word that comes in a verse soon after "za-ba-nee-yah". Some literature properties like this are what constitutes the alleged literally miracle of the Qur'an. The whole of the Qur'an is known for having a rhythmical pattern. And the Qur'an uses figurative speech sometimes "...And indeed there are rocks which fall down for the fear of Allah..." [2:74], should we examine the rocks to see that they have feelings of fear when they fall? 4- Google Earth, correct direction on a straight line of 815 KM, watch this Video I have done the line in Google Earth myself and it's exactly like in the video, here is a file of the Places you want to check it yourself in Google Earth http://www.mediafire.com/?p9optxjq5w5164d I'm totally oblivious of the astronomical ways of determining direction, can someone here tell me how this is possible? Now I will show some some biological errors in islamic texts, I need knowledgeable people to confirm they're errors, I want to objectively know wether that god exists or not. Since the methodology for apologists was to cherry pick the words meanings that fit their alleged miracles or that hold true with scientific data, to disprove an islamic passage, I'd try forcing all possible meanings of the words, and disprove every single one. Islamic text errors 1- "...We made the lump into bones..." [23:12] Since in classical arabic dictionaries, cartilage is defined as "soft and tender bones such as those of the nose, etc...", so with some fudging, bones here can mean cartilage. Basically, this verse can only mean that the embryo/fetus is at one point in time formed fully of bones and/or cartilage which is rediculous OR formed mostly of bones and/or cartilage. I want to know, is there such a stage where the embryo/fetus is formed mostly of bones and/or cartilage (so let's say about 75%)? 2- Many Hadiths talk about the cause of the resemblance of the newborn to his family and the cause of sex determination, since the words are vague, I wrote all possibilities of their interpretations, I want to know the validitiy/invalidity of them First: Can resemblance to the respective side of the family be affected by one of the 2 fluids (semen or follicular fluid) 1) being dominant over the other? (Tell me if that description fit in any way) 2) preceding the other spatially to a certain point? 3) preceding the other chronologically (which of the parents discharges first) Second: Can the sex of the newborn be determined by either of the respective parent's fluid 1) being dominant over the other? (Tell me if that description fit in any way) 2) surrounding the other? 3) overlying the other? That was long Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!