Science and Islam

What is science The word 'science' comes from Latin, and means 'knowledge.' Merriam-Webster's definition of the term is: "knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method." [1] The scientific method is a way of acquiring facts about scientific claims. [2] Inaccurate science Inaccurate science describes two things: (a) Faulty method used for verifying a scientific claim, and (b) A scientific claim that goes against an established scientific theory or fact. With regard to (a), examples of faulty verification would be to not rule out multiple possible explanations for an observed phenomena, having a bias toward validating a hypothesis so that one subconsciously gets specific results (known as 'research bias'), etc. Concerning (b), a scientific claim that goes against established science would be e.g., the moon is larger than the sun, or water can boil at any degree. Both of these claims go against several scientific facts, hence they fall under the category of inaccurate science. Quranic text Muslims consider the Quran to be the verbatim word of God. This ultimately means that everything in the Quran is generally direct speech from God, unless the point of view (referred to as PoV) comes from another person, such as through quotation. For instance, Quran 17:101 says, "To Moses We did give Nine Clear Signs: As the Children of Israel: when he came to them, Pharaoh said to him: 'O Moses! I consider thee, indeed, to have been worked upon by sorcery!'" In this verse, God quotes Pharaoh to explain an important point in history. Thus, it is not God who told Moses that he was under a curse, rather it was Pharaoh who did so. Did Con successfully manage to prove that the Quran goes against science in any way? Let's find out. Rebuttals 1. Astronomy A: Setting of the sun Con quoted [18:86] of the Quran to prove that it speaks of the process where the sun sets. His argument is severely flawed. First, the PoV is clearly from a person other than God. This person is referred to as 'Dhul-Qarneyn." This is very important, because if God simply said that the sun sets, then we would have a general statement about the sun setting, which would go against science. However, this is not a general statement from God. It merely speaks from the point of view of another person. What's more, the wording here is very precise in Arabic, which clears any confusion when read properly. "When he reaches the setting of the sun, he found it..." The Quran, in English translation, states this person found the sun to be setting. The important words are "he found," which indicate that from the perspective of Dhul-Qarneyn, the sun was setting. This is obvious, because even though the sun does not set, it does appear as if it were setting. Consider this: Japan is called "The Land of the Rising Sun," not because it is considered to be the place where the sun literally rises, but the land which is among the first to find the sun to be rising. Moreover, the rise/setting of the sun are phrases that are far too common in all languages, so there's nothing wrong with the Quran using a phrase that is common. Imagine if the Quran explained this verse in a scientific way: "When Dhul-Qarnayn reached the place where the earth could be witnessed orbiting around the sun..." It would make absolutely no sense to people in old times. Let's have a look at the Arabic wording in the verse. 'Wajada' is a term that means something in the line of 'to appear as / it appeared to.' And 'Maghrib' means "the time of day when the sun goes down and night begins to take over." [3] For the Arabic reader, this verse makes perfect sense because the wording is very precise. Being that the Quran is considered the highest piece of literature in Arabic, a translation of it is very difficult to make. Thus, if we use correct wording in English, the verse would be translated and interpreted as: "When he arrived at the time of sunset, it appeared (to him) over a muddy spring, and he found a people thereabout." This makes perfect sense when using a precise translation, and there is no scientific error. To summarize: (1) The Quran speaks from the PoV of another person, not God, (2) The word Maghrib used for "sunset" also means "the time of sunset" which is perfectly correct, and (3) Even if the word is meant as "place of sunset," the fact that it only "appeared to" Dhul-Qarnayn says that we cannot call this a scientific error, because it is true that even though the sun doesn't set, it does appear to humans as if it sets. This couldn't be more clear. Regarding the hadith Con cited, it is not an authentic one, and I cannot find it in any authentic collections of hadith (such as Sahih Bukhari). Those words are falsely attributed to the Prophet. B: Sun and the moon Con cited a verse which says that the sun and moon float in their orbit. I have no idea how he sees this as a scientific error. It's correct that the earth orbits the sun, and the moon orbits the earth, but the Quran nowhere makes any contradictory claim. In fact, what the Quran says is scientifically speaking quite marvelous, considering it states that the sun and the moon have their own orbits, which is something that couldn't be discovered 14 centuries ago without modern astronomical equipment. Consider the following verses: "The sun and the moon follow courses (exactly) computed." (Q 55:05) "It is He Who created the Night and the Day, and the sun and the moon: all (the celestial bodies) swim along, each in its rounded course." (Q 21:33) And there are several similar verses. The Quran very precisely and correctly states that all celestial bodies swim in their own courses. Nowhere is it mentioned that "the sun and the moon follow one course." Course/orbit is mentioned in plural form, obviously implying that the celestial bodies such as the moon and the sun all swim through the universe in their own paths. This is an astonishing claim, and not a wrong one. 2. Biology A: Everything created in pairs Con argues that the Quran is wrong in saying that everything is created in pairs, since we have organisms that are sexless, and so on. First, there's nothing here which indicates that there isn't anything in-between a pair. Second, notice how general phenomena come in pairs. Night/day, good/bad, ad infinitum. "In 1928, however, it was discovered that solid matter also had a pair. In that year the British physicist Paul Dirac demonstrated the possibility of other, invisible particles existing along side those of matter. Then, in 1932, K. Anderson discovered, while studying cosmic rays, that with electrons there were other particles with an opposite electric charge. These particles were called anti-electrons. This research was pursued further and finally it was learnt that all particles in the universe existed in the form of pair-particles: particle and anti-particle, atom and anti-atom, matter and anti-matter; there was even, as Dirac showed in 1933, an anti-world." [4] In his book "The Bible, the Quran, and science," Dr. Maurice Bucaille, a late French scientist who converted to Islam, wrote, "We know that fruit is the end-product of the reproduction process of superior plants which have the most highly developed complex organization. The stage preceeding fruit is the flower, which has male and female organs (stamens and ovules). The latter, once pollen has been carried to them, bear fruit which in turn matures and frees it seeds. All fruit therefore implies the existence of male and female organs. This is the meaning of the verse in the Qur'an." [5] B: Coming next round. The resolution is affirmed. References [1] http://www.merriam-webster.com... [2] http://dictionary.reference.com... [3] http://www.islamic-dictionary.com... [4] http://www.islamicfinder.org...= [5] http://tinyurl.com...