Hello
Assalamu alaikum Peace be on view. Welcome back to another series in our program of Islamic focus. We’re continuing with our 13th program in our series dealing with sources of Islam. There we began a new segment on the topic of the crown and modern sciences. I’m your host, Thomas Rashid. And I have joined on the program as usual Dr. Jamal battery of segments in the roasting village among assembled economic personalities. Before we embark on today’s topic, could I have a very quickly summarize the main points that we touched on in our program last week? Sure, last time was a discussion of the hypothesis of, or possibility that some writers raised about the other sources of the Quran in the
Quran has borrowed from other sources, and investigated that this time, from the historical standpoint rather than creed, which was covered in previous programs. And on the question of stories or historical aspects about prophets, for example, we found that there are certain things which are in the Bible which are not in the Quran, there is no parent in there. And this will not just mere details that were left out, that the things that does not appear in the Quran are totally consistent with the theme of the Quran itself and its view of prophets in other things that we discussed previously. Secondly, and that’s an interesting part that there are certain historical things in the
Quran, which is not in the Bible, even though it relates to ancient prophets. And the question here, where did the Prophet Muhammad, get this information? And obviously, you could have not adopted that at all from from the Bible, because it’s not there.
And you said, but even common stories about profits which appear both in the Quran and the Bible, we have seen that there are some measures and imperson differences and certain details here and there, which are significantly significant in terms of their implication. And he indicated also that the Quran did make a challenge to the contemporaries of the prophet who denied the divine origin of the Quran, that this information was not known to the prophet or to his people, and nobody was able to challenge that particular fact. The final question was, that some people may ask, how do we know when when it deals with ancient history, where the only basic sources on that are the Bible and the
Quran? How do we know which narratives is comparatively more accurate or the accurate one, in which case I said that perhaps the benefit of the knowledge obtained relatively recently in modern sciences, could perhaps shed some light in finding some
answers to some of these historical and interesting questions. That brings us to today’s topic. Yeah, I understand that. Some Muslims tend to be rather reserved about interpreting the Quran in the light of modern sciences. Why do you believe that? So, in fact, this is one extreme one of two extremes. This, this extends that you mentioned,
who say that after all, the Quran is essentially a book of guidance, spiritual guidance,
even though it involves other things that are guiding various aspects of life, but it’s not intended really to be a book of science as such.
Secondly, they also uphold that, if you try to tie science with the Quran,
they claim that science also may change and what is known today may change tomorrow with the emergence of new evidence or new discoveries.
And they said why not keep the Quran away from this fluctuations in the issues of silence. But the other extreme also that goes the other way?
Are those who might be overly zealous and whatever new theory emerges, even if it’s not proven yet, just a hypothesis even or some new thought.
The john concerning water couldn’t mention that, you know, sometimes.
It is my humble understanding.
That’s a really
sticky
and balanced view.
Now, what is your comment on on these objections from both types of? Well, to start with, if it’s true, one has to agree that the Quran as a revelation of the book of Allah is essentially a book of guidance to humanity.
But in the Quran, also notice that there are so many differences to natural phenomena, things that you see us, around us in the universe. And in that respect, we have to make a distinction between two things that are contained in the Quran.
The aspects that deal with belief, worship, the moral system, social, political and economic system on one hand, and between certain differences that the Quran need to creation or natural phenomena around us. Now, with respect to the first category, there should be no difference and no difficulty of interpretation of their foundations. Because the matters of belief and worship, anything like that you should not be subjected to fluctuations has to be really clear, clear cut.
But on the references pertaining to science and scientific discoveries, when this is a matter, again, that you have to investigate and find that out. And in that respect, you can make a distinction between two types of information that are information which can be called scientific facts. That is something that has been established beyond any doubt that science has proven, for example, to say that the earth is spirit. Nobody denies that it has been proven has been pictured from the spirit, there’s no question about them.
And between what you might call theory, a theory could be a combination of some scientific discoveries. But there are also some assumptions as to how these facts fit together.
And again, when even you talk about scientific theory, there are degrees there are some theories that are reasonably well established. Like, for example, the origin of the universe being on one part and then split into two parts. It seems to be well established, it’s a living donor where they can say I was there
to see, but there are also other series that are still a little bit more shaky. So what I’m saying here by by real distinction is that if you talk about scientific facts, are established and verified and can be verified again, then it is impossible to find any text in the Quran that contradicts this established scientific fact, it never happened for the first 200 years since the revelation of the Quran, I don’t think it will ever happen.
But when it comes to Siri, that’s a different matter. Siri, people can understand the Quran in one way or the other depending on their state of knowledge at a given point of time, but there’s no absolute guarantee they’re going to be right in the
reflection and understanding. But the other extreme, trying to just jump on any funding that may emerge which is tentative and say this is inadequate. I believe that this reflects a search of apologetic approach, because it may reflect the attitude, as if we are trying to prove the validity of the Quran, by science. And for anyone who believes in the Quran as the word of Allah, the divine revelation,
Allah or God does not need verification from any human being. The truth in the Quran is inherent is innate or intrinsic in the Quran itself. It doesn’t need the proof from any humans. But what you can say, by the way, you say the word of Allah is the truth. And then science may agree with the Quran not delivers.
The science may agree with the Quran, when people discover certain things. And this will be interesting because they may understand some of the verses or passages in the Quran, which were not clear to them before in a different light that you don’t know the other way around. So if we approach it with that particular reservation, and with this understanding, I think it could be useful and interesting area of research. But could you give us a few examples of what the Quran says about that, by way of stimulating us. There is nothing that I’ve seen in the Quran that prohibits us from thinking or using the means of science and scientific discoveries to understand the Quran.
In fact, the opposite is true. The Quran is full of verses or passages, which end with such ending like FML. And Varun, as Allah is known as the lie attacker, which means don’t they think, don’t don’t see, don’t they?
Don’t they reflect?
So this seems to show that there’s an open invitation for us to, to investigate. And if you might recall, in the previous one of the previous series on the economic system of Islam, on the topic of production and productivity, and we gave a number of citations, but let me give you different citation than the ones that we covered before.
In surah, 21, passage 30 in the Quran, that’s a really interesting one in the translation of meaning, it says, Do not deliver, see that the heavens and the earth were joined or fused together?
Before we separated them, and made from water, everything living, do they not believe?
Now, the fact of the Quran gives some reference to the origin of the universe that the heavens and earth were all one part. And we’ll come back to that when we get to the explicit mention of basic scientific things in the Quran. It doesn’t that imply that they have to think and study in analyzing, discover, or investigate this question that the Quran just
induced us to look into another interesting area or passage in the Quran, it says simile him is enough
in the translation, meaning soon, when we refer to God, the Creator will show them our signs in the horizons and in themselves, until it becomes manifest to them, that this is the truth.
Now, notice here in the translation, we use the term horizon. Some translators say that we will show them our signs in the heart of the stations, that the original words in the Quran as half actually means horizons, for example, has an inner loop in his Dictionary of the wording of the Quran, he says, fact means the balance of heavens and earth, it’s not only limited to Earth, it could also include space. So what does God mean by he’s saying it by saying that we will show them our science in the horizons, which could be horizons of heavens and earth, that means science, scientific discoveries, could also fit their
sign of God. And it says in themselves, some translated in their songs, but actually unforeseen things in themselves, which could mean whether in their souls or in their bodies, also new discoveries in the medical sciences, about the functioning of the human body, and then the verses, so that it become manifested in that this is the truth. What is this? The referencing is obviously to Docker. And because the previous passage to that one immediately speaks about people who reject the defining origin of Docker and keep arguing that it did not come from Allah, that’s the response to them. So it is, until they realize that this quote, is from Allah, which means if you take all
these elements of that passage, there is a clear implication in my understanding that they should think they should contemplate and the more they discover,
in sciences, pertaining to the universe, or themselves, the more than we realize that this court references, it really could have not been inherited from the mind of any human being, and as such, to realize was proof that it has come actually, from Allah, that’s from the Creator. Another similar citation also a fellow to the burden of documenting
the 11 cathedra which means that, don’t they reflect on the Quran? And had it been from any source other than Allah, do that scene and so much contradictions or discrepancies, which could mean discrepancy internally, between various parts or discrepancy with established established scientific facts? And this is the real challenge really, for humanity to look into all scriptures including the Quran and try to find out you know, what, exactly is the situation. This, by the way, was inserted for chapter four verse 482. So what I’m concluding from there here is that this discussions and investigations will help us in answering a question that was raised in several programs before what
is the social worker?
Who’s the reinforcer from the Quran? Is it possible accord or tenable that Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him? He has learned that from any other source or
borrowed, quote, unquote, from another scripture, I think this would be really useful. And perhaps the best reference on that subject is the book by bouquet that we mentioned, towards the end of the previous program, Shere Khan.
The book was written by, okay, the Bible, the Quran, in science. It sounds like a very interesting book. Can you tell us a little bit about its author and its basic findings in the book? Well, the
title of the book in English is the Bible, the Quran and science.
It was written originally in French, under the title,
law dakara Colossians. And the author’s Maurice bouquet is he might call a physician scientist, he has a very good background in science and he is also a physician by profession.
The book was translated in several languages, of course, including English, which was published in 1977, in North America by the American trust publication. And what Dr. King did in that book, which is a very interesting, and we’ll use for word
is to compile the citations in both the Bible and the Quran, pertaining to science or scientific aspects.
And then he tried to test the statements both in the Bible and the Quran, again, is the
findings of established sciences. And his basic findings is that while
the review the citations from the Quran, he found that there’s absolutely no single statement in the Quran, on anything that relates to science, that has been proven to be untrue. That is, it’s totally compatible with established scientific facts.
He said that the same thing does not hold with respect to any other scripture other than the Quran that this was uniquely the characteristic
of the Quran.
In addition to this comparative person, he also compiled other verses in the Quran, which doesn’t have a parallel in the Bible pertaining also to science, creation, and so on. And again, we came up with the same conclusion that none of them is incompatible at all with even the most recent discoveries in science. For that reason, perhaps he is,
in his last chapter, concluding chapters,
explains the scene of the book, at least as I understand it. And it says, and I quote, in page 251, in view of the level of knowledge in Mohammed’s day, it is inconceivable
that many of the statements in the Quran, which are connected with science, could have been the work of a man.
It was more of a perfectly legitimate, not only to regard the Quran as the expression of a revelation, but also to our gift, a very special place, on account of the guarantee of authenticity, it provides in the presence of scientific statements, which when studied today, appears as a challenge to explanation in human terms. So basically, his conclusion and you find this throughout his writing, that it is inconceivable that 1400 years ago,
unlettered man like Prophet Muhammad in the kind of environment he lived in, and with the state of knowledge of the world at that time could have made all these references, if you will, the author of the Quran are adorable from any other source. But what specific areas of comparison Did the doctor Okay, analyze? Well, there are three areas that seem to connect very closely to that particular scene. One is the study of creation, that is the creation of the universe. Secondly, is the dates are approximate dates for the emergence of the first human on Earth, life on earth. And the third one, deals with the study of the flood. You know, this famous flood during the days of Prophet Noah,
and he made lots of interesting comparisons. This is even though he talked also about the Exodus.
But in a different slightly differently, but these three areas are
heavily competitive in nature.
And I’m sure that many of our viewers would be eager to learn more about the least common questions I want to fetch we can start with the creation of universe. How did the doctor bouquet compare the biblical and current versions on that picture?
Question. Okay one with respect to the biblical
narrative about the creation of the universe, it appears particularly to the book of Genesis, especially the first two chapters, maybe even the first chapter, if you want. In Genesis one, verses three to five,
we are told that the day and night were created in the first day in the heavens, an advocate and six days and the first day they were created.
Secondly,
if you continue also in the same chapter, the first chapter in Genesis, verse 14, in the Bible, it indicates that different elements, or let’s say heavenly systems, were created in the fourth day, in order to give light to earth, and that also to determine the seasons, the variations of seasons.
The thing that’s located Dr. Buckley refers to is that it is quite firmly established now in science, that the phenomenon which is related to the day and night, changes of seasons
are very much related to the rotation of Earth, around its own stars, or in the light of its own star, which is the sun.
And as such, from the scientific standpoint, it is totally inconceivable that the day and night were known on Earth, before the creation of the firmament are heavenly bodies, which give light actually. So how could this feminine be created in the first day, even though the day and night were created in the first day, the opposite actually should have been to
this problem, has no existence whatsoever in the Quran, because it doesn’t get that sequence at all.
Another aspect that Dr. brocade refers to in the same chapter of Genesis also from verse nine to 13.
That it says that on the third day of creation, God created vegetations, and plants which use seeds and fruit trees, bearing fruits in which they seed that’s the terminology used in the in the Bible.
Again, science has established now that the organized
vegetation or vegetable kingdom,
which includes seeds, that has this characteristics of reproducing itself, through seeds, could have not taken place before the emergence or presence of the sun.
Because after all, that sun that causes this vegetation, highly developed vegetation to grow.
But according to the book of Genesis, in verse 14, we are taught that the sun was created in the first day, that is, the day before the creation of vegetations. Again, there is a problem with sequence here. If it was if it said the opposite would have been true, you can’t have vegetation without creation of the sun. So the order here is a bit problematic. Again, that second problem does not exist the tournament round because the sequence again, is not given. The question here is this. How could Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him, if he wish, if it was true that he was adopting or borrowing from the Bible, carefully avoid these particular points, which were shown after hundreds
of years, from his birth to be
incompatible with scientific facts and discoveries.
However, the emergence of the first human on Earth
once again, deductive decay starts with the with the Bible, in that respect.
And
he makes an interesting analysis of the genealogy.
He said, for example, the Bible indicates that Prophet Abraham was born
about 19 148 years after Adam. He did that by simply going through the books of Genesis, especially Genesis four 511 21, and 25. And then you compiled a list of the various descendants of Adam, the first man on earth, and the date of births and deaths and how long he did each live so so it can come in 248 years from Adam to Abraham. Now from Abraham to
Jesus peace be upon him. He says, even though the Bible does not specify that using other sources and reasonable estimates, it’s
seem to come close to 1800 years with a slight margin of error. So 1800 years from Abraham, to Prophet Jesus peace be upon him. And of course from Jesus to today it is almost 20 century. So that’s 2000 years. If you add that up, it comes through 2000 plus 1800 plus 2000. That’s what about 5800 years. And by the way, the Jewish calendar, which dates from the creation of Adam, is actually about that time and the present years in the Jewish calendar is
58 something. So let’s shows again, that this is the way the genealogy was understood in the Bible.
And obviously, that kind of genealogy is inconceivable, possibly from the scientific standpoint.
Why is that impossible and lucky is given in the Quran in comparison to the possibility given in the in the Bible. Okay, let me take the second part of the question for the Quran doesn’t mention any of these dates. So the problem doesn’t arise at all in the Quran. But as far as why this is inconceivable scientifically is that there is sufficient evidence now, from our, you know, archaeology, from the excavations and from anthropology, that the dates of the first human on Earth goes far goes back much, much farther than 6000 years. In fact, as Dr. McKay said that there are remains of humans capable of human thought and action, whose age may be calculated in the 10s, of
1000s of years. Living alone, some of the remains, which are not certain to be an ns of humans, there are some questions about them, that goes back into hundreds of 1000s of years, even if you discount
this remains and just focus on the more certain ones, when 10s of 1000s of years, is quite a bit different from 5800 years.
So it’s quite impossible, really, that this will be compatible, scientifically. The question here is that again, if Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him, was borrowing from the Bible, why did he borrow those dates? If it sounds interesting to people also to have a specific engineering issue with explicit dates? How could you live such kind of thing that was not known to be compatible scientifically, even in his
image, many hundreds of years later, it was discovered? What is the source of the Quran?
In what was the reaction of theologians to the findings of Dr. McKay, and what actually he himself mentioned some of the actions that some theologians has given to this difficulties. And he divided them into groups, for example, there are people like St. Augustine, for example, who could not conceive that the Bible could have anything that is incompatible with reality.
There are those who try to provide as he call the sort of apologetic type of answer that is there right? After all, the Bible study makes the point. And if there’s some, you know, mistakes when they’re, you know, they said, the essence of the Bible is correct. And, of course, that’s fine as an answer. But would that also mean that other statements about divinity of human beings, for example, should be reviewed? That means we can apply the same logic? There are those who said that the, what they call, literally judges of the social factors affecting different writers of the books of the Bible might have affected the way they understood things. But again, if that is true, does that mean
that we should really examine carefully some of the doctrines that has been accepted for hundreds of years because again, it’s quite possible that reflects the attitudes or the understanding of the writers rather than the reality as revealed originally by by God
and benevolence case, he mentioned something really interesting, he said, but in the Second Vatican Council that was held between 1962 and 65, can be considered a document number four, and he quotes them It says, that these books refer to the Old Testament,
even though they contain material which is imperfect and obsolete, this is the document of the council itself contains material which is imperfect and obsolete nevertheless,
nevertheless bear witness to children divine teachings.
I would just like to add one quick note here, if I may, that is the Bible and the Quran are studied both with respect to yours but with open mind and open heart.
I’m sure many of the difficulties and problems that result from the compatibility of some statements in the Bible with science could be easily resolved with this kind of open minded comparative study is conducted.
by Amanda I think we’ll conclude our program for the day. We want to invite you back next week we will continue our series dealing with the sources of, of Islam, and the Quran of modern science. We’ll continue with other comparative issues, beginning with the story of the flood. Thank you for watching. Assalamu alaikum peace be unto you
