(December 14, 2019 at 10:38 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote:(December 14, 2019 at 9:22 pm)Chad32 Wrote: I'm sure there are things that holy books get right. It's just that they don't get everything right, unless maybe you interpret them loosely. Thing is, some enlightened god should be able to inform people without confusing them.
To avoid the "loose" interpretation, word meanings and grammar rules must be used on the sentence investigated in the original language of the text.
I don't think that the text of the Quran is confusing; but I think that many Muslims simply did not like the meaning and each attempted to twist the text via changing the semantics of the whole text by the introduction of the "Hadith".
The "Hadith" is the tool that allows Muslim scholars to interpret the semantics of the Quran -which language rules and Arabic grammar dictates- into what they see fit to serve a political or an economical agenda.
(December 14, 2019 at 9:31 pm)Jackalope Wrote: Most common reactive elements, but yeah ^^^ what this guy said ^^^.
Water is inevitable where hydrogen and gravity both exist in sufficient quantity.
But it's quantity would never be enough to form the oceans.
To become a planet full of water, earth had to take a "a very strong push" from asteroids and comets full of ice.
No one is denying that the water (the majority of it, at least) came from space. The issue is whether the Quran got it right. It's kind of telling that Islamic scholars have never brought up the origin of water on Earth until after scientists sussed it out.
But let's suppose that, a few years or decades from now, the asteroid/cometary sources of water is found to have been wrong. A new theory posits that water was produced on Earth by exclusively terrestrial processes. Will you admit that the Quran got it wrong?
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
