New Member :), I've waffled on a bit so apologies in advance.
OP - February 13, 2014, 02:43 PM
Hello, I'm new to the site and I just wanted to introduce myself. I was brought up in a moderate Christian family but I learnt most of the verses of the Bible at school. I did believe in the existence of God as a child but as I became older and fascinated with Science, I naturally began to wonder what the most probable cause of the Universe was and what created life on Earth.
I often heard religious people explain that there must be a God because complex things like 'the human eye' could not have just happened by chance and therefore God must have made it. That raised two important and rational concepts in my then, young mind. First of all, God is meant to be omnipotent and omniscient, the most powerful entity in the world. It must be infinitely complex, yet religious people believe it happened first and by chance, I found this extremely illogical and impossible to believe. Although the 'Big Bang' is only a theory, it seemed far more probable and believable than the God creation concept.
Secondly, using the example of 'the human eye', I knew that it didn't happen by chance, it happened through millions of years of natural selection through evolution. There is definitive proof (using fossils and primitive life forms still alive today) of how the eye evolved from a very primitive instrument, to the very complex one we see today. Evolution of animals and homo sapiens is also not a theory anymore, it's a fact. There is no missing link in the evolution of humankind as many religious people like to believe.
I decided to study Science at University which only strengthened my belief that the likelihood of God was improbable. However, the event which broke the camel's back was when I decided to read the Bible for myself, warts and all. I was quite shocked at how obvious it was that there was no divine inspiration and that it was clearly written by the men of that time (I still don't know how women can accept the obvious sexism).
After years of being Agnostic, I happened to have a very interesting conversation with a Muslim taxi driver. He explained how incredibly brilliant and knowledgable the Quran was. He explained that it was nothing like the Bible and was full of scientific miraculous facts that couldn't have been known at the time.
Obviously his enthusiasm for this holy book really rubbed off on me and I decided to read it with an open mind. The more I read the Quran, the more I was confused as to why he thought I should read it (maybe he didn't think I would and would merely believe his words).
To me there's not one sentence that couldn't have been written by a man or men at the time. There are no scientific miracles and the theme of the book seems to be more about vengeance, hatred and hell, rather than inspiring morals, humanity, ethics and love within people.
If we hypothetically asked the question; "if we know for 100% fact that Allah is fictional, could Mohammad have produced precisely the same Quran"? With all other variables being the same, the answer is certainly 'Yes'. For me it's so clear it's actually slapping you in the face on almost every page. Everything in the Quran either relates back to Mohammad's life or directly influences Muhammad's future life for the better. The Quran is not influenced by Allah but by the interactions Muhammad had with his Grandfather, as well as the different tribes, religions and even the findings of previous scientists, astronomers and cosmologists. Unfortunately for Mohammad, some of the scientific, astronomical and cosmological principles that he thought were facts at the time, were only theories that have long since been dispelled.
I'll only mention two of the numerous supposed miracles of the Quran expressed to me by Muslims I've met; the spherical Earth and embryology, but hopefully I can discuss more in the future. You only need to study the 'Classical Antiquity' to realise Mohammad and the Quran was centuries out of date even at the time of conception. The Earth was discovered to be spherical over 1000 years before Muhammad was born by Phythagorus, then later coo-berated by Paramenides, Artistotle and many more. Philolaus as early as 5th century BC discovered that the Earth was spinning and Oenopides determined the angle between the plane of the celestial equator, and the zodiac (the yearly path of the sun in the sky). He also found the tilt of the Earth to be 24°. Samos 4th century BC disproved the common consensus of a geocentric universe for a heliocentric one, where the Earth was not the centre of the Universe but orbited the Sun. Eratosthenes 3rd century BC not only knew that the Earth was spherical, but he also calculated the size of the Earth within 2%. Some Greek scientists were also aware that the Sun was in fact, a close up star, very different from Mohammad's strange description of stars.
There are many more examples of known literature at the time of Muhammad that was far more accurate than his interpretations. It's clear Muhammad believed in a geocentric universe where the Sun orbits the Earth and he wasn't aware of the Earth spinning on a titled axis. He wasn't even sure on the shape of the Earth even though every respected Greek scientist were in agreement that it was spherical.
You may wonder why Mohammad was so far behind known scientific discoveries. I believe it's because he was influenced more by the beliefs of other religions and in particular the Syriac Christians and monk Bahira. 'Flat Earthism' lingered longest in Syriac Christianity, which tradition laid greater importance on a literalist interpretation of the Old Testament. Authors from that tradition, such as Cosmas Indicopleustes, presented the Earth as flat as late as in the 6th-7th century.
With regards to embryology, the description in the Quran is by no means a miracle, it's not even ahead of its time. If you read the work carried out by Aristotle and particularly Galen (2nd century BC) it is clear their work influenced the description in the Quran, although Mohammad's description is severely lacking in detail and is inaccurate compared to modern science. It is no wonder why Mohammad was so ambiguous and gave little detail when talking about scientific facts unknown to him because the more ambiguous and less clear you are, the harder it is to disprove. You would think a prophet of God would be well ahead of his time in his scientific knowledge rather than being well behind mere mortals that were alive 100's of years before he was born.
I have many more reasons to refute the Bible and the Quran which no doubt I will express in the future. However, finding the CEMB and reading comments from very knowledgeable people has given me much hope for the future.
I'm not exaggerating when I say that people who have the courage to question the validity of Islam are themselves visionaries of their time. Banuch Spinoza opened the doorway to the 'Age of Enlightenment' for Christianity. The purpose of this cultural movement in Europe was to reform society using reason, to challenge ideas grounded in tradition and faith, and to advance knowledge through the scientific method. It promoted scientific thought, skepticism, and intellectual interchange (notice the similarities to many conversations that happen on CEMB every day).
It was a revolution in human thought which was opposed to superstition and intolerance. Imagine what could be achieved if Islam went through the same cultural movement. I firmly believe the Quran has held back human rights, gender equality, scientific enterprise and innovation throughout the Islamic World for centuries. I'm hopeful that the insightful and erudite members of the CEMB can have a really positive and purposeful influence.
Sorry for waffling on :/ ha.
Topic: New Member :), I've waffled on a bit so apologies in advance.