The Qur'an is not the word of God, it contains too many scientific mistakes.

Hello fuzala, how are you?Before I reply we have to agree on something first. You will definitely agree that the God/Allah is perfect and since the Qur'an is the word of God, then the Qur'an is the perfect word of God. Thus the Qur'an is perfect and should be absolutely clear. I am quite sure there are no objections to this statement. It is also stated many times in the Qur'an as well. "That's your interpretation. It is well known that people have subjectivity that influences the way they interpret holy books. That's how one gets differences in opinion." The perfect and clear word of God should not have different interpretations. Second, the verse is quite clear on the contrary. Third, the people living during 7th century Arabia, how are they going to draw a different conclusion than this? The verses goes 1-2-3-4 very simple and clear. 1. "you surely disbelieve in who created the earth in two days, and you set compeers to him, that is the lord of the worlds" 41:9?; Quite simple and clear, nothing really major in all English translations to indicate anything other than the earth was created in two days. Any objections?2. " And He made therein anchorages (i.e. mountains) from above it, and He blessed it and determined therein its nourishments in four days, equal (i.e. all these four days were equal in the length of time) to the questioners (about its creation)." 41:10; Again I doubt any objection to the interpretation that the earth is complete by then. This what the verse clearly indicates that the earth had it's mountains and food and all so the earth we know now it exists. But this verse presents a problem also of itself. The earth creation required 4 total days, while the rest of the universe required only 2 days? It took 1.5 more time to build the earth than it took for the universe? 3. "Thereafter, He leveled Himself to the heaven (while) it was smoke, then said to it and to the Earth, "Come up (you two) willingly or unwillingly!" They (both) said, "We come up willingly." This ayah is the root of all the problems. The word "Thereafter" is actually "Then". In Arabic "Thumma" means "Then" and the verse clearly in the beginning says Thumma. "Thumma estawa ela al samaa' we heya dokhan". Which means then he leveled him to the heaven when it was smoke. The problem here is that is speaking as if heaven and earth are completely two seperate entities. Also it clearly claiming that afte he finished the creation of the earth and set the mountains on it "Then" he leveled himself to the heaven as it is in another place or dimension when it was smoke. Here is your big bang by the way. Last part of the verse just proves it furhter, he asked the heaven (when it was smoke) and the earth (after it is completed), do you come willingly or unwillingy. 4. "So He decreed them as seven heavens in two days, and He revealed in every heaven its Command. And We have adorned the lowest heaven with lamps, and (set Angels) preserving them. That is the determining of the Ever-Mighty, the Ever-Knowing" After the heavens and the earth come willingly, he made the heaven into seven in two days and he adourned the lowest heaven with stars. It continues the previous verses, earth in two days, rest of earth in another two days, the last two days he turned to the universe or the big bang as you claim and made them into seven??!! and made the stars. How is that scientifically possible? How can one interpert these verses any differently? How can a 7th century Arabian be able to tell the justifications you are giving me today? Lastly, if an omniscent God really wrote this book the verses that were unrefuttable would've been something more like this. "God created the heavens in two days. THEN he created the stars in two days. Then he created the earth in two days". This would've been chronolgically much better and much more in relation to the actual timing of the evens happening. "I don't know if you noticed, but all the links were from one site. It's the site I use to better understand things because I am not a native speaker. A lot is lost in the translations; thus, I cannot do raw interpretations. Also, is the Arabic in the Qur'an the same as the Arabic that is spoken today? Do Arabic speakers not have trouble interpreting the Qur'an on their own? I know someone who speaks Arabic and has told me that she has trouble interpreting. She does not claim she has the qualifications to make interpretations. " Yes i did notice that all the links are from one site. The Arabic spoken back then is the Quraishi dialect which is dead now. The trouble is not in interpretations, the trouble is in the vocabulary which is a little bit different than the Arabic we speak today. This makes certain Ayahs hard to understand because of a certain word or a phrase not really common in that person dialect. "There are several instances of this in the Quran that the word thumma is not necessarily used to show the chronological order but it is also used for the order of Presentation." So the argument here presented is only in trying to prove taht the word "Then" does not mean chornological order. I am sorry what? Thumma means then, plain and simple. You can never use it for anything else. How would saying "i went to school then i woke up from bed" by a correct sentence? Am sorry this makes no sense. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------"As I mentioned before, Karam says "The word 'zawgyne' is consistently translated into the English language as 'pairs.' In scientific literature its meaning is extended to incorporate such concepts as 'duality", 'complementarity', 'opposites', 'inverses' and several other concepts reflecting conjugate and/or reciprocal properties." Correct, but when the word everything is accompanied i should find that 100% of the time the world consists of a binary system. If i find one thing in the world that doesn't follow this rule, then this statement is false. If in a scientific journal if i write i "Always" find that X is always paired by Y, then it should be 100% X pairing with Y. Anything else i would be wrong and since is God we are speaking about here then his words are perfectly chosen. Everything is created in pair, then it must be. I gave plenty of examples and you replied to none thus far. What is the complentary of a bacteria or a virus. Where is the pairing here? "Since pairs can also mean complementarity, meat and the fork used to eat it can very well be used to fit the meaning of pairs." Really? Are you serious :)? How about a knife and a fork and meat? Really i can't find anything to comment on this. "You mentioned the sharks and "virgin birth". I'll mention the Virgin Mary and the virgin birth of Jesus (pbuh). Let me say again that pairs is not just about reproduction. " I don't believe in the story of jesus and it means nothing to me. You are trying to prove your book from your book. Circular argument. On the other hand, i know this is about everything. Like night and day, male and female. So if there is a species that exists only in females, then the ayah is incorrect. Let me elaborate futher, the word used in the Qur'an is "Zawjayne" which actually means more of mates. Zawaj means marriage, Zawj means husband, Zawja means wife. So how is the presence of a lone species with no mate is in conformoty with the Qur'an? "Another thing I want to note is concerning language.When someone says "Everything in my life is messed up," does that mean everything in their life is messed up or does it mean that there are numerous things in this person's life that are not going well? I would say the meaning fits the latter. The person obviously means many things in their life are messed up even when using the term everything. This is just something to think about, but I am not using it in relation to the verse since I am not a scholar. " You said it, "when someone". That someone is a human, he is not God. He's just saying a word that is not for all times and places. If a human wrote the Qur'an then i would have no problem with that, but this is God we are referring to her. He is perfect and his words are perfect. Any imperfection indicates that the Qur'an is imperfect, thus not the word of God.