His throne is on water..stunning scientific theory that the Quran foretold 1400 y ago

[FebruaryOfReason]

All the kings mentioned in the bible implicitly have their thrones on land unless otherwise mentioned.
And the world is made of land.

This cannot be a coincidence. It must be definitive proof that God exists.

[FebruaryOfReason]

So if the super fluid hypothesis turns out to be wrong, you'll admit the Koran is fundamentally flawed and Allah was not the prophet of god?

...

FebruaryOfReason

It usually doesn't matter, because if a person don't want believe, they won't even if they saw all the signs.

Whereas if you want to believe, you'll ignore any facts that contradict what you believe, and take the flimsiest "evidence" as proof that what you want to believe is true.

For example, 1 word in a 1400 year old book is the same as 1 word in a newly developed and as-yet-unproven theory. So you immediately start a topic saying "This confirms the Koran is right".

But as Jenny A says, if the theory is refuted, you will start precisely 0 topics saying "This suggests the Koran is wrong".

[ignoramus]

Fifty times a day? Just when you thought god couldn't get any more egotistical.

[LastPoet]

Guys. Dumb Question. I'm not good at interpreting stuff from the bible as I don't have a motive to decide whether something should be literal vs metaphorical.

When Jesus turned water into wine, what's that proving? That he can do magic tricks? Is that all? I don't think he was helping anyone by turning them into alcoholics.
What's the moral story we are to take from it?

That was actually the last thing hanging me to the faith. It would be preferable to turn water into beer, but I wouldn't complain much

[paulpablo]

So if the super fluid hypothesis turns out to be wrong, you'll admit the Koran is fundamentally flawed and Allah was not the prophet of god?

I need more to disbelieve in the whole religion. I will hate myself and ask for forgivness though, for projecting the verses of God on mere theories without making sure first.

Esqulax

You're right.
I projected the verse on the theory; and that was before I validate such theory.

But to correct you: water in ancient Arabic is not "H2O" only, it refers to any liquid. You can see an example in the Quran itself; semen is referred to as "water".
Why go so far; in English itself, it's so common to refer to a liquid with the term "water"; doesn't "her water broke" ring any bell?

So I'm deeply sorry but no. The water in the verse can refer to liquid so easily, it makes sense even more, saying otherwise makes me wonder about who is debating based on a pre-determined opinion.

To be honest, you didn't answer this: how did Mohammed predict this? what made him say that the universe is drenched in water -which we know it can mean liquid and mostly: it is-? wouldn't it be more and more safe and believable, to say that the universe is drenched in air??

Again I remind you: in ancient Arabic, semen is refered to with "man's water; literally". There's a sickness hitting the eye and cause blindness, called "white water". Acid is called in modern egyptian arabic "fire's water موية نار" -we have an egyptian member who can validate this-. The odds are against your argument.

How do you know Muhammad didn't incorrectly predict that the universe is drenched in semen?

Not a joke by the way. I'm being serious.

And of course the quran word for water definitely doesn't mean H20 in the quran. The person who wrote the quran wouldn't have known what H20 is.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Guys. Dumb Question. I'm not good at interpreting stuff from the bible as I don't have a motive to decide whether something should be literal vs metaphorical.

When Jesus turned water into wine, what's that proving? That he can do magic tricks? Is that all? I don't think he was helping anyone by turning them into alcoholics.
What's the moral story we are to take from it?

That was actually the last thing hanging me to the faith. It would be preferable to turn water into beer, but I wouldn't complain much

As it says in Proverbs 20:1 (MSG) = "Wine makes you mean, beer makes you quarrelsome— a staggering drunk is not much fun."

Jesus loved wine.  Matthew 9:15 (MSG) = "Jesus told them, “When you’re celebrating a wedding, you don’t skimp on the cake and wine. You feast. Later you may need to pull in your belt, but not now. No one throws cold water on a friendly bonfire. This is Kingdom Come!”"

You get a better buss when wine is mixed with water.
2 Maccabees 15:39 (CEB) = "Just as it is harmful to drink wine or water alone while wine mixed with water is delightful and produces joy, so also may the writing of this story delight the ears of those who encounter this work. The end."

[RozKek]

AHH THE GOOD OLD SCIENTIFIC SHIT IN THE QUR'AN. When the science is "against" them they deny it! And when the science is "with" them they accept it!

Mr. ConfirmationbiasS33, how come you didn't mention all the other scientific miracles in the Qur'an, hm?

Like the one where the Qur'an says that iron came from outer space. "How could Mahmoud possibly know that a stunning 1400 years ago before modern science?" Well he fucking didn't. It was knowledge taken from the ancient Egyptians, they knew about it around 5000 years ago because they harvested iron from meteorites. And I'm pretty sure you can see meteoroids (meteorites before impact) falling from outer space/the sky. So there goes one scientific "miracle" to hell. Also note that it wasn't God's words. It was ancient Egyptians knawwledge implemented into the Qur'an.
[source: http://www.nature.com/news/iron-in-egypt...ce-1.13091]

"But, what about when the Qur'an mentions the BIG BANG!?" Actually the Qur'an wasn't first. The Sumerians were, it was a sumerian creation story (didn't represent the Big Bang fyi, just misinterpreted). So the people who wrote the Qur'an thought this made sense and implemented it into the Qur'an. 
[source: http://nautil.us/issue/17/big-bangs/the-...tion-story]

"Hold on, the Qur'an says that the our Earth is spherical, explain that!" Yeah, thanks to Pythagoras around 500 B.C. an ancient greek mathematician and philosophor had the brains to calculate it/know it, so, yeah. It was possible before modern science. Here again the writers of the Qur'an took knowledge from others and implemented it. Scientific "miracle"? Nope.
[source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagoras] (CTRL+F search: spherical)

And don't even mention the embryo. It was also taken from the ancient greeks. They had theories on it, Aristotle studied it and even gave accurate description to the embryo development of a hound shark.
[source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle] (CTRL+F search: embryo)

What about when the Qur'an mentions that the moon doesn't shine, but reflects the sunlight? How could Mahmodi have known that? Yet again, taken from the ancient greeks.
Anaxagoras knew that the moon reflected didn't shine and reflected light around 500 B.C
[source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anaxagoras] (CTRL+F search: moon)

I don't care enough to mention others, if there are any... And before you ask how could Muhammed have had access to all this knowledge. Well if you didn't skip school, or at least made your research then you would have known around the times the Qur'an was written or modified, the arabic empire was huge. It stretched out very far, and they were great at trading since they made their own silver coins, which became more and more common. They had many universities filled with ancient greek knowledge, they had even learnt a lot from the Indians, including mathematics, medicine etc. And all the knowledge they've taken has been in their reach: Mesopotamia, ancient Greece, Sumer etc. Coincidence?

And, also. Did you actually read the article, or just the headline? 
1) They don't literally mean fluid
2) They are talking about superfluid which by definition is "an unusual state of matter noted only in liquid helium cooled to near absolute zero and characterized by apparently frictionless flow (as through fine holes)" 
3) They are asking how particles/waves etc move through space and they're only modelling it as a fluid.
4) You should read up on what Apophenia is, so you realise that you're just assigning meaning to meaningless stuff.
5) If the Qur'an truly had scientific miracles, scientists would use the Qur'an as a source.
6) And very smart and intelligent people would be debating it.
7) This isn't proven.
8) And did it ever strike you that maybe the writers of the Qur'an said that God's throne is on water because they'd believe that God "lived" outside of the earth and the sky looks blue like clear water in an ocean?

You're just clinging onto your faith for some stupid, irrational reason. Spend your time on something that will actually benefit you, something that will make you smarter, something that will open your mind to logical and analytical thinking not overrun by irrationality, something that will make you thank your mother after finishing the food instead of thanking God (I hate it when my siblings thank God, as if God Ramsey prepared the food). There have been studies shown that non religious people are in general a bit more intelligent and more rational. That wasn't said to offend you, but to introduce you the possibility that you should consider what others are saying, and maybe accepting that right now, in this moment, you might be irrational, and you should change your way of thinking.

You're adapting your beliefs to what you want to be true instead of adapting your beliefs to what is true, what evidence shows, what is logical and rational, what is more likely.

Goodluck in the future.

Note: Sorry if I have many misspellings, typos, etc. I wrote this very late at night.

[WinterHold]

Then you have a logical problem.  If the verse describing super fluid provides stunning proof of the divine inspiration of the Koran because the Koran predicted a scientific finding hundreds of years in advance, than it's describing a the failed hypothesis must be proof it's not being divinely inspired.  The only way out of the dilemma is to admit the truth, which is that it doesn't really describe super fluid or at the very least doesn't describe it well enough to be evidence of anything.

No, it means that my interpretation was wrong, that's all.
Mohammed  -the prophet- is dead. I can't ask him.

Though I can ask God, until we swim out to shore or drink from the void, nobody can be certain; Jenny.

Esquilax

So, just to clarify: you'll take any overlap between the Quran and modern knowledge as prophetic, but in those cases in which the Quran's statements are contradicted by later knowledge, there's no problem? That which agrees with the Quran is evidence, but we're just supposed to ignore the reverse? Why is that?

It's pretty long to call something that you can't see; an "overlap". Here: take the following question:

-God don't exist according to the scintific method..
thus; science disproved God !

There's nothing to answer: you've merely assumed a prediction without demonstrating that it is, based on a science article that we've already agreed is in no way confirmed as truthful. See, "these things can be contorted to match!" does not mean that the one predicted the other; it just means that poetic, figurative language can occasionally be twisted to overlap with reality. You'll actually have to demonstratethat A: the Quran is talking about this specific phenomenon, B: that the phenomenon is actually true, and C: this is a divinely inspired prediction, rather than a lucky guess. You're skipping a whole lot of steps before you can call this a prediction.

A needle in a pile of hay never rings a bell?

Between all of the failed theories in the history of man, Mohammed mentioned a theory that quantam physics elected it to be a true possibility ?
Interesting...

Redbard the Pink

I actually do.
The Jeiwish Torah, along with the Christian Bible, do have truth in them, but there is a lot of forgery that touched the books.

Check this verse from the Quran:

Sura 5
( 65 )   And if only the People of the Scripture had believed and feared Allah, We would have removed from them their misdeeds and admitted them to Gardens of Pleasure.
( 66 )   And if only they upheld [the law of] the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to them from their Lord, they would have consumed [provision] from above them and from beneath their feet. Among them are a moderate community, but many of them - evil is that which they do.
( 67 )   O Messenger, announce that which has been revealed to you from your Lord, and if you do not, then you have not conveyed His message. And Allah will protect you from the people. Indeed, Allah does not guide the disbelieving people.
( 68 )   Say, "O People of the Scripture, you are [standing] on nothing until you uphold [the law of] the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to you from your Lord." And that which has been revealed to you from your Lord will surely increase many of them in transgression and disbelief. So do not grieve over the disbelieving people.

So yeah, I do believe in some parts in both books..

robvalue

I actually hate this world rob, I agree.
But I know the fine line between fantasy and reality.

MrNoMorePropaganda

E=MC2, is a 4 character statement, MNMP, and written in a book.
Your name on your ID card is a reality, written on one line too.

Though, trying to catch any tiny fragment while drowning to survive and float, is just an evidence of desperation, not stupidity.
Your mother -as most Christians- is desperate, MNMP.

Jesus's story is not convincing. It's a heathen story. That's why just like heathens, Christians who believe in this theory cling to idols -crosses; statues of Marry-.

 When I say Muhammad traveled between the seven heavens, what I mean is he traveled back and forth between Moses and Allah several times. This was Muhammad's night journey. Fifty prayers a day was too much so Moses wanted Allah to reduce that amount. And, with help of Muhammad, he succeed.

This is a Hadith, it is not a good source for information.
The Quran never mentions such thing.

[downbeatplumb]

Why is all the "scientific stuff" in koran written like a riddler clue?
My first is in water, my second in sky, kind of thing.
Bullet points and specific instructions would have been nice. To prevent infection during child birth boil all utensils and cloth used. Would have been much handier.(cue Atlass finding a koran verse that vaguely hints at warming things)

[ReptilianPeon]

MrNoMorePropaganda

E=MC2, is a 4 character statement, MNMP, and written in a book.
Your name on your ID card is a reality, written on one line too.

Though, trying to catch any tiny fragment while drowning to survive and float, is just an evidence of desperation, not stupidity.

The ancient Arabic of the Quran has words equivalent to "super" and "fluid" (liquid) so why use the word water? Why 'beat around the bush' as they say? Allah didn't need to muddy the waters by putting the word water in place of the words "super fluid". That would be so much more convincing. But super fluid universe is just speculation.

If it turns out the universe is not super fluid after all, does that mean the Quran is wrong? Currently you're taking the Iyah to be scientifically accurate (even though the science not confirmed). There's no guarantee the verse agrees with the science since science is always changing.

Your mother -as most Christians- is desperate, MNMP.

All religious people are keen to prove people they disagree with wrong. Listening to debates made me non-religious. And people who are Christian may think you a desperate. That's when it clicked: Religious apologists easily see the flaws in each others texts but never their own.

Listening to people dissect the Bible debating people who love to dissect Quran made me realize that if I was born in let's say Azerbaijan, because they've been in the news recently, I'd be a Shiite, I'd love Ali, hate Aisha, and, most importantly,  I'd have been brought up to believe the Bible is full of junk. But it happens that I was born into a Bible believing family which think the Quran is junk (Chrislam is a thing).

I realized that religious people were all using the same arguments to convince the non-religious but coming to different conclusions based on no evidence. There is nothing in Kalaam Cosmological Argument, that old Arabian argument (Ilm al-Kalām) that William Lane-Craig dusted off and started using, that points to any particular deity. Yet William manages to make it say "Yaweh" even though the argument was originally about Allah.

Jesus's story is not convincing. It's a heathen story. That's why just like heathens, Christians who believe in this theory cling to idols -crosses; statues of Marry-.

I don't thinking ant communicating verbally with king Salomon or Noah's flood are convincing. http://talkorigins.org/ discussing Noah's flood in great detail and shows why all of the attempts to prove it happened are silly. I think it's a story the Jews copied from the Iraq-Iran area when the Babylonians took them over there but maybe you have a better explanation.

 When I say Muhammad traveled between the seven heavens, what I mean is he traveled back and forth between Moses and Allah several times. This was Muhammad's night journey. Fifty prayers a day was too much so Moses wanted Allah to reduce that amount. And, with help of Muhammad, he succeed.

This is a Hadith, it is not a good source for information.
The Quran never mentions such thing.

I'm not so sure. The Hadith go into more detail for sure. But the Quran alludes to the story. Surah seventeen is called "The Night Journey" (Sura Al-Isra), is it not? I purchased the study Quran for occasions such as this one. The Surah gets it's name from Muhammad's night journey so it's not really accurate to say the story is exclusive the the Hadith seeing as Quran came before the Hadith and has a Surah called Al-Isra.

Quran 17:1 surely refers to the Muhammad's journey through the seven heavens. How do you explain the verse if it's not referencing the story of Isra and Mi'raj? What is your understanding of Quran 17:1?

This study Quran is so great. It has so much detail. It's good stuff. I could spend hours with it.