I would consider you reading it ok
The regeneration talks about life after death, not life after death on earth or on the universe, who knows it might be another world dimension.. So there is only one collapse..
Then, it is said the moon is the light while the sun is a blazing lamp, when you talk of blazing lamp, it literally means it produces the light by its self, but moon as just a "light" does no produces light by its self, a reflected surface might be called a light but not a luminous light, it is called light because it produces light, but not luminous, while the sun is termed burning lamp, which means its luminous...

I would consider you reading it ok
The regeneration talks about life after death, not life after death on earth or on the universe, who knows it might be another world dimension.. So there is only one collapse..
Then, it is said the moon is the light while the sun is a blazing lamp, when you talk of blazing lamp, it literally means it produces the light by its self, but moon as just a "light" does no produces light by its self, a reflected surface might be called a light but not a luminous light, it is called light because it produces light, but not luminous, while the sun is termed burning lamp, which means its luminous...

I would consider you reading it ok
The regeneration talks about life after death, not life after death on earth or on the universe, who knows it might be another world dimension.. So there is only one collapse..
Then, it is said the moon is the light while the sun is a blazing lamp, when you talk of blazing lamp, it literally means it produces the light by its self, but moon as just a "light" does no produces light by its self, a reflected surface might be called a light but not a luminous light, it is called light because it produces light, but not luminous, while the sun is termed burning lamp, which means its luminous...

And like you said you mentioned "wandering stars", to wander means to move aimlessly without a direction... but according to the verse it says the planets ride on their "course" ...... And this was documented in a book thousands of years ago before astrnomers, discovered planets moving in orbits and course either trajectory or rotational

so many facts scientific community has disregared, even regardless of these claims, an example is the discovery that man had existed more than millions of years ago... And also scientific world, is a world of western civiliasation, although civiliasation started in the east, therefore they wont agree with any facts or claims from the quran...

Is there a reason for triple posts? It is messing with my eyes here.

And here we go with another "book of fables" trying to be "deciphered" to mean more than it does.

Take it at face value and then it is gobbley ****...lol sorry because it is for the most part,

At best it looks to me as the musing from a man a long time ago of what the world and sky showed him or may mean.

Not anything "holy" about it.

Islam/Qaran in some cases is more "out of touch with reality" than the bible is.

aww... Am sorry i dont noob heads like you on my topic... I need people with good sense of deep thinking, not dumb surface thinkers that write out of point comments, you could comment on my other general topics, but not this one, sorry buddy

Avatart,

I've looked over the web site you linked to. I'm personally not the slightest bit impressed by their methods. I've seen this same sort of thing done by Christians using the Bible. In fact, it's the same old stuff really. Obviously the Biblical Old Testament and much of the Qur'an are basically the the same superstitious folklore.

I disagree with many of there comparisons and analogies. Then tend to misrepresent scientific knowledge a lot too. Like the idea of a Big Crunch. That was a scientific hypothesis at one point, but it no longer has any scientific credibility.

More importantly it's rather easy to take an idea of any kind and find something in these stories that could be made analogous to it.

So personally I'm not impressed by these things. If you are, more power to you!

But if you're out to prove it to others, then I'm not convinced.

I dismiss these ancient stories for other reasons as well. IMHO they are totally inconsistent even with their own claims as well as being inconsistent with the personified character traits of their godhead.

So I dismiss them solely on their own self-contradictions. No science required.

Pls before to say something like "research" first try at least to read that main holy books ..

Your Wiki- knowledge doesn't fit to the "research"

Thank you .. agree

i posted the wiki link to make you have a brief knowledge of what am implying.... so does it look like i havent read the quran or what?.... Have studied the quran, the bible both old and new testament, book of enoch, torah... Am not a new to all this

There is indeed a remarkable history of Islamic science but it has little to do with religion or the Quran.

See for example the "Second Master" - Al-Farabi
and many many many others...

For centuries Islam was at the pinnacle of scientific
and mathematical thought. Perhaps with the demise of
radical Islam they will return...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Farabi

well thats ok... We choose what to believe, even though there are clear facts shinning like bright lights.... I can decide to regard "A" as "B"... Even though the fact is so clear "A" Is not "B"..... Some people are atheist, some are muslims some are christains, some are jewish, rosicrushians, buddist, hindu, zorastarian, wicca.... E.t.c, the will to believe is a choice

the will to believe is a choice


Curious.. spoken like a true apostate.
There is no choice in Islam.

lol..... inquisitiveness and wide knowledge and understanding is awesome.... So where is there a choice?

I have some questions for you.

Apparently you believe that the Qur'an contains information that suggests that their may be a conscious supreme creator that is attempting to communicate with us via various authors and prophets.

First off, are you suggesting that this supreme being would only attempt to communicate with this creation via a single culture and just a handful of prophets?

Or do you believe that all spiritual inspired men from all cultures were inspired by the same creator? In other words, the Qur'an is just one of many writings and stories throughout the world that were inspired by our creator?

Secondly, do you think this Creator is still attempting to communicate to humans to this very day? Should we be paying close attention to men like the Dahlia Lama, or Deepak Chopra, etc. Are these men the modern day messengers of the supreme creator's thoughts?

In other words, do you think that this creator is still attempting to communicate with us, or do you think he has stopped trying?

Finally, do you think that it's important to believe in this creator? If so, why? And why would a creator who so desires recognition not make itself more easily accessible?

lol... sounds like you proved him right...

I don't expect to convince you of anything, but you should know that science is a weak foundation for any belief about the universe, existence, and most other things. The scientific method by its nature commits the fallacy of asserting the consequent (A, therefore B). Bertrand Russell, the famous atheist, admitted this, and never tried to use science to "disprove" religion.

You don't need to tell me that. I've worked in the sciences my entire life. I fully understand what science is. And you are perfectly correct. Science is not only a weak foundation for a philosophy of life, but it's not even designed for that purpose.

Science is basically nothing more than a mechanical and mathematical description of how the physical universe works. I do accept that science is indeed very good at what it is designed for. I accept that science does indeed correctly describe physical manifestation to a very large degree, from the Big Bang, to the evolution of the human species.

If there exists a supreme creator then the knowledge of science is most likely the means by which the creator created this universe.

As I've often said, my objections to the stories of the Abrahamic fables are contained within those fables themselves. No need for science to "disprove" them. They shoot themselves in the foot repeatedly on their own, as far as I'm concerned.

There may be some spiritual truths associated with some of those tales. But that's probably true of all spiritual fables and tales, even those that we consider to be complete and total myths.

But to hold any one of them up as being the preferred "dogma" of God misses the whole point to them in the first place.

@abracadabra
each culture has their own prophets... With the same doctrine, abraham, moses, jesus, budda, muhammed, solomon, david, enoch.... All with the same, aim of preaching monotheism, (only one God)... But as time changes.. The books sent to them, as a means of communication between god and man has been corrupted, for example the holy bible of today, is a book that has been written and re-written by different people, even those that are not christains, in medevial day.. Original revelations has been changes, and even translations from a language to another, has i previouly explained, has tend to change the orignal meanings of this scriptures...
It has been stated in the quran that more than 10000 prophets has been sent down to different culture, some prophets has seems not to be successful, and thats why they dont have any recorded history... For example zarasthura was never successful, little or no people knows about his religon
and yer i believe all prophets metioned in the quran, torah and bible, and those from the old testament, has been inspired by a supreme being, because all their prophecies are almost similar.. And with the aim of preaching the existence of one god, in different ways

then according to the stated scriptures of the quran, the supreme being states that muhammed would be the last prophet
the creator has made himself available through his messengers angels to the prophets, and even to mere creatures

i believe the creator is like a master scientist, and not something of spirituality, and i think science and spirituality are indirectly the same... I could define a mobile phone as a spiritual device and a scientific invention,
based on spiritualty, i would define electromagnetic meduim, as a realm in which voices are being transfered.....

jrbogie post :



The most precision reaction till now ..lol

Thank you jrbogie ...