Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Debunking Qur'anic Science: Does the Qur'an Predict that the Moon Reflects Sun Light? Is this a Miracolous Prediction?

A whole range of Muslim apologists have claimed that the Qur’an is miraculous in its prediction of the moon reflecting sunlight; about this matter Zakir Naik writes:

THE LIGHT OF THE MOON IS REFLECTED LIGHT

It was believed by earlier civilizations that the moon emanates its own light. Science now tells us that the light of the moon is reflected light. However this fact was mentioned in the Qur?aan 1,400 years ago in the following verse:

"Blessed is He Who made Constellations in the skies, And placed therein a Lamp And a Moon giving light." [Al-Qur?aan 25:61]

Consider the following verses related to the nature of light from the sun and the moon: "It is He who made the sun To be a shining glory And the moon to be a light (Of beauty)." [Al-Qur?aan 10:5]

"See ye not How Allah has created The seven heavens One above another, "And made the moon A light in their midst, and made the sun As a (Glorious) Lamp?" [Al-Qur?aan 71:15-16]

http://www.scribd.com/doc/18926563/Quran-and-Modern-Science-EnglishBy-Dr-Zakir-Naik


See also a youtube video debunking Zakir Naik’s speculation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIw_obd7a-k

Osama Abdallah has also made similar claims:

So why would Ibn Kathir come up with this statement, many centuries before man discovered that the earth was spherical and that the moon does indeed reflect the sun's light?

http://www.answering-christianity.com/ahmed_eldin/light_of_moon.htm

Notice that Osama Abdallah believes that Ibn Kathir came up with statements about this scientific accuracy only because the Qur’an makes such statements.

Firstly, I am not so sure whether Kathir got this idea from the Qur’an, I don’t think the passage from Kathir clarifies that.

See also two articles from Answering-Islam that refute the claim that the Qur’an even utters such claims:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Science/moonlight_wc.html

http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Shabir-Ally/science10.htm

http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Osama/zaatari_moonlight.htm

However, let’s assume that the Qur’an does describe the moon reflecting sun-light; are Zakir Naik and Osama Abdallah then correct in their claims that these are miraculous statements, that these ideas were unknown prior to the revelation of the Qur’an?

The answer is no! This is yet again and example of the typical lies spread by modern Islamic apologists.

In fact the concept that the moon reflected sun-light was a very common concept even a thousand years prior to Islam.

Then why do individuals such as Zakir Naik and Osama Abdallah spread such lies to the masses?

There are three possibilities:

1) Either they knowingly spread such misconception and hence willingly deceive their readers and listeners.

2) Or they have simply not done their homework.

3) Or they are simply taken over by their emotionalism for Islam and are blinded from considering the related facts.

For example:

Anaxagoras (4-5 Century BC) indicated that within the ancient scientific of his time it was argued whether the moon shines by reflected light or emits its own light. Even in this era, even without divine revelation human thinkers got a number of ideas scientifically correct, such as Aristarchus (310-230 BC) whose ideas predicted the modern scientific discovery that the earth with the other planets orbits the sun and that the earth was in a constant rotation, and completed a full rotation once in every twenty-four hours (Russel, History of Western Philosophy, p.222-223).

Hence I wonder why Zakir Naik and Osama Abdallah not give up their faith in Islam and build a religion around Aristarchus, or include him as one of the greatest prophets ever; at least his ideas predict modern science and must therefore indicate divine revelation.

However, let’s look at how common this concept was prior to Muhammad and the rise of Islam:

Thales (585 BC):

The moon is lighted from the sun. 29; 360. Thales et al. agree with the mathematicians that the monthly phases of the moon show that it travels along with the sun and is lighted by it, and eclipses show that it comes into the shadow of the earth, the earth coming between the two heavenly bodies and blocking the light of the moon (Doxographi on Thales, Aet. ii. 1 ; Dox. 327) (6).

Anaxagoras (500-428 BC) considered the moon be to a false-shining star (255).

The Doxographist elaborate further on this:

The moon is below the sun and nearer us. The sun is larger than the Peloponnesos. The moon does not have its own light, but light from the sun (The Doxographists on Anaxagoras, Hipp. Phil. 8 ; Dox. 561) (260-1).

Empedocles (490-430):

As sunlight striking the broad circle of the moon. 154. A borrowed light, circular in form, it revolves about the earth, as if following the track of a chariot (Empedocles, translations of the fragments I) (177).

Ptolemy (90-168):

The Moon principally generates moisture; her proximity to the earth renders her highly capable of exciting damp vapours, and of thus operating sensibly upon animal bodies by relaxation and putrefaction. She has, however, also a moderate share in the production of heat, in consequence of the illumination she receives from the Sun (Ptolemy?s Tetrabiblos: Book the First: Chapter IV, The Influence of the Planetary Orbs) (13).

Lucretius (100-50 BC):


How then, if the sun is so small, can it give of such a flood of light (p.189)?

The moon, too, whether it sheds a borrowed light upon the landscape in its progress or emits a native radiance from its own body. What then of the moon? It may be that it shines only when the sun’s rays fall upon it. Then day by day, as it moves away from the sun’s orb, it turns more its illuminated surface towards our view till in its rising it gazes down face to face up the setting of the sun and beams with lustre at the full. Thereafter, it is bound to hide its light bit by bit behind it as it glides around heaven towards the solar fire from the opposite point of the zodiac (192-193) (Lucretius, The Nature of the Universe).


The Jewish Talmud gets this right:

Abraham once worshipped the moon and said: The light of the moon must be derived from the light of the sun (A Cohen, Everyman?s Talmud, London: J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd/NewYork: E.P. Dutton & Co. Inc, 1949: 2).

Hence once again we have refuted Zakir Naik, Osama Abdallah and a number of modern Muslim apologists who claim that the moon reflecting sun-light was a concept unknown prior to the era of Muhammad and the Qur’an, that is of course only if the Qur’an truly makes this prediction in the first place; but that is stuff for another article.

I urge therefore Zakir Naik, Osama Abdallah, Harun Yahay and others to correct this error.

32 comments:

Brianman said...

Islam comes to confirm the truth obviously.

The Islamic Pen said...

Salaam or Shalom to all my Dear Christian,Muslims and others Brothers and Sisters. Life Time Challenge to David Wood's Guru Uncle Sam



Before Jesus (PBUH)
“Psalm 146 :3 Put not your trust in princes, [nor] in The SON OF MAN, in whom [there is] no help”.


During Jesus (PBUH)
“Matthew 20:28 Even as THE SON OF MAN came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.”

After Jesus (PBUH)
“Acts 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, A MAN APPROVED OF GOD among you by MIRACLES and wonders and signs, which GOD DID BY HIM in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:”


I think many Trinatarians got my point, Do you people have any answer?

If you Mr. Sam and Chriatians think they are winners, Please come in front of our Brother Dr. Zakir Naik. In India, Pakistan, UK, USA or any where.

You people tell us not to listen to Dr. Zakir Naik. But why you people listning to Sam Shamoun. You people are making him your Hero Idol. He is also liar. If Zakir Naik has started PEACE TV what is your people problem. We support Peace TV, It is our hard earn money. I think Sam also want to start TV channel ABNsat as he also is dealing In fooling MUSLIM and you stupid 3 in 1 GODs believing Christians.

Please do not fool us emotionally, If you got any answers from the above biblical verse. Then answer us.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Brianman,

Your argument fails, since each philosopher confirmed the truth; the Qur'an is only one source among many included; that is of course, unless the claim of Islamic apologists is only bogus; a misrepresentation of the Qur'anic passages.

As to Acts 2: 22, we do believe that Jesus was fully human and that the Father did his work through him.


Hence Islam did not confirm the truth it only plagiarized the truth.

Islamic Pen,

Psalm 146: 3 is not about Jesus

Matthew 20: 28 is answered if you study Isaiah 9, Isaiah 40 and Malachi 3 and Zechariah 12.

Zechariah 10: 12 reads: 'And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child.'

Hope that answers you question.

As for debating Zakir Naik, David Wood and Sam Shamoun have already challenged him numerous times and publically, it is Zakir Naik who is running not the Christian apologists.

As to peace tv it is a propaganda channel, its presenaton of Islam is false and the arguments for Islam and against Christianity are weak and futile and easily refuted if you brought in a proper Christian apologist.

Why waste your hard working money on deception?

Fernando said...

dear brianman saide: «islam comes to confirm the truth obviously»

and where is the miracle in thate? where's the miracle in saying: "yep, you're right 2+2 equals 4"?

can someone explain? thankes...

Fernando said...

Hi dear The Islamic Pen said...

I liked a lot to read your post...

now, can you present another comment withe any sort off inteligence? thankes...

ben malik said...

Psalm 146:3 has already been answered by Shamoun in the following,

http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/q_son_of_man.htm

http://answering-islam.org/authors/shamoun/rebuttals/zaatari/jesus_saves.html

The Islamic Pen said...

To Mr. Hogan Elijah Hagbard the jew, Uncle Sam, Dawood Woods and Funny Farnando.

I want the answers, because these verses from bible are true. the title Son of Man which stand for Jesus(PBUH)who was just a Man a prophet not God

Before Jesus (PBUH)
“Psalm 146 :3 Put not your trust in princes, [nor] in The SON OF MAN, in whom [there is] no help”.


During Jesus (PBUH)
“Matthew 20:28 Even as THE SON OF MAN came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.”

After Jesus (PBUH)
“Acts 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, A MAN APPROVED OF GOD among you by MIRACLES and wonders and signs, which GOD DID BY HIM in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:”

Sydneysider said...

What a lie, My version of the Bible says Psalm 146:3 refers to "Do not trus in nobles, in man, who annot save". How do you possibly get the "Son of Man" ( referring to Jesus as fulfilment of prophecy)in this verse?

Brianman said...

We are looking it from different standpoints - The base of my statement goes by the fact that God authored the Qur'an, so obviously we differ there. You obviously don't come from where I am coming from, so you can't 'refute' what I said.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Islamic Pen,

I answered your questions, I told you Psalm 146: 3 is not about Jesus. Several individuals are referred to as Son of Man, this passages only says 'man'. I even provided you with passage you can study.

Brian,

I have no clue what you are on about. If the Qur'an merely records what was common knowledge within its time, it is no confirmation, but consent, in the same way as the philosophers agreed and quoted the ideas of each other. This is not a miracle in the Qur'an or anything of significance. The Qur'an many not even refer to the moon-reflecting sun-light, it may simply be modern islamic propaganda.

hugh watt said...

so,"Islam comes to confirm the truth".ok,lets have a look at it.Jesus is the Messiah,s.3:45 etc.agreed!Jesus is virgin born without earthly father?agreed!Jesus is Kalimatullah,the Word of God?agreed!so,what is this that i read in John 1v1."In the beginning was the Word.the Word was with God,and the Word was God"!Muslims have problems grasping the Trinity,explain to me what is Wudu?you do Wudu 3 times yet it is considered as ONE!yes,Truth has been confirm.

hugh watt said...

Brianman said,"Islam comes to confirm the truth obviously"!like Jesus was born of the virgin?agreed!S.66:12.that He was Messiah?agreed! S.3:45 etc.that He was Kalimatullah,the Word of God?agreed?S.4:171.yes!"in the beginning was the Word the Word was with God and the Word was God"!but we already knew this.have you read Psalm 33:6? read about those clay birds He supposedly made? the truth has been confirmed,in the Holy Bible.

Fernando said...

The cumulus off vacuus deciept: «You obviously don't come from where I am coming from, so you can't 'refute' what I said»...

its like saying: you do not believe in homeotherapy so you can't tell me that I have a broken leg...

hugh watt said...

Brianman said...
Islam comes to confirm the truth obviously
like Jesus being born of the virgin?agreed!like Jesus being the Messiah?agreed!like Jesus being Kalimatullah,the Word of God?yes,agreed!so, what is this i read;"in the beginning was the Word,the Word was with God,and the Word was God"!all things were made by and through the Word,Psalm 33v6.i even read about clay bird(s)given life in the Quran.how about that!yes the truth has been confirmed,obviously!!!

VJ said...

If you Mr. Sam and Chriatians think they are winners, Please come in front of our Brother Dr. Zakir Naik. In India, Pakistan, UK, USA or any where.

to the dumb pen

you seem to be one of the ignorant ones here or on the cyber world,your friend joker naik is a coward to debate real apologist,ask him to accept the challenge of SAM,wood,qureshi,white if he is man enough...

if your best apologist is a coward then your another coward unless he accepts this challenge...

till then happy surfing answeringmuslims.com

tc
VJ

Fernando said...

The cumulus off vacuus deciept (#2): «You obviously don't come from where I am coming from, so you can't 'refute' what I said»...

its like iff somme budhist woukde say: hey, you are not a budhist like me so you cannot refute when I say Bhuda is more important than muhammad...

minoria said...

Hello Islamic Pen:

You are right that in the OT "Son of Man" means human,except in one instance in DANIEL.But in the GOSPELS it's really different.

SON OF MAN IN THE NT

We have 50 sayings by JESUS ONLY(and by nobody else) in the 4 gospels where ONLY Jesus uses the phrase "Son of Man".

ONLY BY HIM

NOWHERE ELSE,in no other NT book,nobody,neither Paul,nor Peter,James,ever ever uses the phrase.

NEVER A CHURCH TITLE

Jesus has been given the title Son of God,God the Son,Prince of Peace,Messiah,God,by the church.But NEVER Son of Man.It has not been the custom.

CRITERION OF DISSIMILARITY

It is one of the criteria of the HISTORICAL METHOD.So the 50 Son of Man sayings are really by Jesus or if you want to be skeptical they have a very strong claim to it.Jesus uses the phrase in different ways:to mean human,and also to mean SON of MAN=DAVIDIC MESSIAH and also SON of MAN=GOD(like when he said "the Son of Man is LORD of the SABBATH).He got the use of the Son of Man=Davidic Messiah and God from DANIEL 7:13-14.

hugh watt said...

hi Minoria, Ezekiel is also called son of man but this is not in the same context as The Son of Man,as you know. still waiting for Brianman's reply to his emotional comment at the start of this post.

ben malik said...

To correct what Minoria said.

ONLY BY HIM

NOWHERE ELSE,in no other NT book,nobody,neither Paul,nor Peter,James,ever ever uses the phrase.


That's not true. Jesus is called Son of Man by Stephen in Acts 7:55-56 and John identifies him as the Son of Man in Revelation 1:12-18 and 14:14-16. So you should correct that.

Semper Paratus said...

The second link Ben provided to Sam's articles on Psalm 146:3 was cut off. Here they both are again -hyperlinked.

Here and Here

Fernando said...

Hi The Islamic Pen...

How do you know thate those verses you quoted from the Holy Bible were not corrupted? You saide they were true (somethingue thate I really do believe), butt therea are also many other verses from the same Holy Bible thate clearly say thate Jesus is God... so, the conclusion must bee only one: Jesus is man and God... wouldn't you beliebe?

Sepher Shalom said...

Islamic Pen said: ”I want the answers, because these verses from bible are true. the title Son of Man which stand for Jesus(PBUH)who was just a Man a prophet not God”

I'm glad you acknowledge that these verses from the Bible are true and authentic word's of God.

Let's look at Psalm 146 and Matthew 20, where we find:

Psalm 146:8 “The LORD opens the eyes of the blind; The LORD raises up those who are bowed down; The LORD loves the righteous;”

Matthew 20:30-34 “And two blind men sitting by the road, hearing that Jesus was passing by, cried out, “Lord, have mercy on us, Son of David!” 31 The crowd sternly told them to be quiet, but they cried out all the more, “Lord, Son of David, have mercy on us!” 32 And Jesus stopped and called them, and said, “What do you want Me to do for you?” 33 They said to Him, “Lord, we want our eyes to be opened.” 34 Moved with compassion, Jesus touched their eyes; and immediately they regained their sight and followed Him.”

The Psalmist says it is YHWH (the LORD) who opens the eyes of the blind. Matthew says Yeshua opens the eyes of the blind. Matthew records that two blind men asked for Yeshua's mercy, and Yeshua replied “what do you want ME to do for you?”. The two men acknowledged Him as “Son of David”, a Messianic title, and they called Him Lord. HE healed them, because it was what HE did for them, and they followed HIM.

While you are working on why Yeshua did something the author of the Zaboor says YHWH does, you have a more immediate problem. Read a few verses before what you quoted in Matthew:

Matthew 20:17-19 “17 As Jesus was about to go up to Jerusalem, He took the twelve disciples aside by themselves, and on the way He said to them, 18 “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem; and the Son of Man will be delivered to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn Him to death, 19 and will hand Him over to the Gentiles to mock and scourge and crucify Him, and on the third day He will be raised up.” ”

So, the very same chapter you quote as proof (of what we don't know...you didn't make that clear) records that Yeshua says he will die on the cross and raise again on the third day.

Regarding Acts 2:22, let's look at the next 2 verses in the Young's Literal translation:

Acts 2:23-24 "this one, by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, being given out, having taken by lawless hands, having crucified -- ye did slay, whom God did raise up, having loosed the pains of the death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it, "

They testify that the Messiah was crucified, and slain. They testify the Messiah was put to death, and then raised to life again. You have a real problem here Islamic Pen. The sources you are quoting from show your Quran is false, and Muhammad was a false prophet. I see no way you claim the verses you quote as authentic, and then find any cause to deny verses from the very same chapters. You also have another major problem. According to Ibn Abbas your Quran says in 36:14 that Peter was an Apostle of Allah and true disciple of Yeshua, and Peter is the one that spoke the words of Acts 2:23-24.

Tafsir Ibn Abbas:
“(When We sent unto them twain) two apostles: Simon the Canaanite and Thomas, (and they denied them both, so We reinforced them with a third) We strengthened them with Simon Peter who confirmed the message conveyed by the other two apostles, (and they said; Lo! we have been sent unto you.”

Why does the Zaboor and Ingeel, which your Quran affirms as the word of God, and which you have just quoted as true, contradict your Quran. Why is the Apostle your Quran says comes from Allah testifying to the death by crucifixion, and resurrection of the Lord Yeshua?

leviMichael said...

pretty soon, there will be no need 4 debate bcos "JESUS or muhammad" has smashed islam into pieces, leaving the muslims on this blog & around the world dumbfounded....

even supporters of osama have seem to abandon him bcos of his cowardness (or maybe allah's) 2 phone in and refute david and sam.

but, its seems that the muslim has one last defense: zakir naik.

(give a few moments 4 u 2 stop laughing)

david, i propose that one of the topics should be dedicated solely to naik; debunking his rhetoric and showing that he is a coward and a liar!

maybe the title of this blog should be renamed to: "How TV killed the muslim-apologist stars"

minoria said...

Hello Ben Malik:

I just checked what you said.You are right,thank you.Many times I have been wrong so that is how one learns.Those 3 non-Jesus SON OF MAN sayings undeniable refer to DANIEL 7.

Adam said...

Dear Bro David Woods,

Kaaba worshippers aka Muslims have more faith in Dr. Zakir Naik than islam.

So the day you and Bro Sam Shamoun expose Zakir you also expose islam.


I am waiting to watch your shows on GOD TV, TBN etc.. as they have global reach, I mean these Christian channels are popular among Cable operators and network distributors.

VJ said...

@adam
i don't think tbn and god TV host apologetic programs,and especially not debates with Muslims,,,correct me if i am wrong but yes it wud be great to see such debates on those channel

Sepher Shalom said...

leviMichael,

I would like to see that too. A program, or a portion of a program that runs on multiple episodes dedicated to interacting with the argumentation and claims of Zakir Naik would be great! It would show them as what they are: empty rhetoric.

Aslam said...

Ok, so tell me the greek philosopher who Muhammad(saw) exchanged ideas with. Produce a chapter like hte Quran.

Aslam said...

“Greek philosophers guessed a lot of scientific details correctly–they anticipated atoms, other solar systems, evolution, the laws of thermodynamics, the rain cycle, you name it. That doesn’t make them supernaturally prescient…” I agree so when Darwin proposed the theory of evolution I suppose he was plagiarizing/borrowing from the Greeks? You need to re-asses your criticism"

Again produce a chapter like the Quran.

hugh watt said...

@ Aslam. Islamic 'science' Pt3.Bukhari Vol:4.546. " Narrated Anas; When Abdullah bin Salam heard of the arrival of the prophet at Medina, he came to him and said, ' i am going to ask you about 3 things which nobody knows except a prophet: What is the first portent of the Hour? What will be the first meal taken by the people of Paradise? Why does a child resemble its father, and why does it resemble its maternal uncle?
allah's messenger said, " Gabriel has just now told me of their answers." ' Abdullah said, " He (Gabriel), from amongst all the angels, is the enemy of the Jews." allah's messenger said, " The first portent of the Hour will be a fire that will bring together the people from the east to the west; the first meal of the people of Paradise will be Extra-lobe (caudate lobe) of fish-liver. As for the resemblance of the child to its parents: If a man has sexual intercourse with his wife and gets discharge first,the child will resemble the father, and if the woman gets discharge first, the child will resemble her." On that 'Abdullah bin Salam said, " I testify that you are the messenger of allah". If a Muslim doctor is reading, this would you like to confirm the last statement!

Varma said...

@Aslam
I don't see why someone needs to produce a chapter like the Qur'an. I feel that other people writing in other languages have produced more beautiful poetry.

Suleiman Bachoo said...

Firstly, the function and the motive of Qura'n is not to predict or elaborate on scientific facts. It is a book of guidance, which touches on every spheres of life to sustain truth and to enlighten man on the virtues of good...being a book that collaborates extensively with the Testaments, that should give everyone a vague idea that it's come to summarize the books and point out only the important issues in the upcoming final modern era of mankind.
Secondly, everyone prejudiced against Islam tends to forget one major fact, that the Prophet(SAW) was illiterate so for him to garner all the resources to attain such knowledge and foresight in this barbaric environment seems like a ludicrous idea. So, Mr. Admin...scrutinize these issues not only with facts but with pure common sense.