Miracle

[Fidel_Castronaut]

None of those things relate at all the topics you say they do. There's no mention of a singularity for the big bang in the Quran ergo = post hoc reasoning.

You wouldn't infer that verse specifically related to the Big Bang unless you knew about it. I mean the iron thing is great. Does the Quran discuss the atomic composition of iron, and how iron is actually formed?

Objective of Quran is to guide people to moral behaviour by discouraging arrogance and meanness rather than predicting science recipes to enhance their somatic comfort. That is the reason scientific facts in Quran become conceivable only after their discoveries. Those imperative scientific facts, which future generations will discern, manifest divine nature of Quran.

Right now, we are facing exactly this situation where no one of us can give rational explanation on “How modern scientific facts get into 7th century Quran.”

Yes we can. Post hoc reasoning. You inferring things that aren't there in an archaic nonsensical 'holy' book from your contemporary knowledge of the current

The end.

*sigh* I suspect without reading this thread that everyone else has rebutted this for the same reason. That should tell you something, but i suspect the indoctrination is too strong and you are forever lost.

Forever Lost! Where? In the realm where you live, where you (atheists) popped out from “NOWHERE,” without any “REASON” and after enjoying few infinitesimal moments then perish into “NOTHINGNESS” again without any “REASON?” Well good news is I am not part of that hopeless idealism.

So, proof by assertion, and an argument from incredulity is what you replace it with?

Cool reasoning bro. Tell it again? Oh BTW, we both occupy the same 'realm', the realm where reality has repeatedly testes every single one of your claims and found them to be false without exception. What a brilliant track record your religion has, so convincing >_>

Oh well, not my life, so I don't really care. Please continue with your confirmation bias and faulty logic

Has anyone yet proved that so-called “faulty logic” to be faulty?

Yes, repeatedly, over several threads. You're just too dense to comprehend how "Random post hoc reasoning therfore [my personal] deity" doesn't even go a millionth of the way towards making what you say true. Using fallacy laden assertions to 'evidence' you view that you very specific personal deity created everything is, at best, utterly ridiculous and at worse shamefully ignorant. You should be ashamed of yourself living in the 21st century yet clinging to the very obviously false mythologies of the 7th.

No one is capable to explain by any natural means how modern scientific discoveries get into 7th century Quran.

Again, Post hoc reasoning.