FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups  Who is OnlineWho is Online   Join! (free) Join! (free)  
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
  • Welcome
  • Guest

  • Main Menu
  • Sticky Articles
  • Open Support Tickets
Oceanology arabic speakers pls

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FREE FAITH, EXPRESSION AND THOUGHT Forum Index -> The Qur'an
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ibnishaq
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Posts: 155


Location: USA
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2008 5:06 pm    Post subject: Oceanology arabic speakers pls  Reply with quote

hi! i was reading transcript of zakir naik vs. william campbell and he made a point about something in arabic. i was wondering if he was right/wrong!

anyways here is transcript.
Quote:

In the field of Oceanology, the Glorious Qur’an says, in Surah Furqan, Ch. No. 25, Verse No. 53, that…‘It is Allah who has let free two bodies of following water - One sweet and palatable, the other salt and bitter. Though they meet, they do not mix. Between them there is a barrier which is forbidden to be trespassed. Qur’an says in Surah Rahman, Ch. 55 Verse No. 19 and 20……. (Arabic) ……‘It is Allah who has let free two bodies of flowing water. Though they meet, they do not mix. Between them there is barrier, which is forbidden to be trespassed.’ Previously the commentators of the Qur’an wondered…‘What does the Qur’an mean? We know about sweet and salt water - But between them there is a barrier - though they meet do not mix. Today after advancement of Oceanology, we have come to know, that whenever one type of water flows into the other type of water, it looses its constituents, and gets homogenized into the water it flows. There is a slanting homogenizing area, which the Qur’an refers to as ‘Barzak’  ‘unseen barrier’ And this has been agreed upon by several Scientists, even of America, by the name of Dr. Hay - he is an Oceanologist. And Dr. William Campbell writes in his book that…‘It is an observable phenomena. The fisherman of that time knew there were two types of water… salt and sweet So Prophet Mohammed during an expedition to Syria, he may have gone in the sea, or he might have spoken to these fishermen.’ Sweet and salt water is an observable phenomenon, I agree - But people did not know that there was an unseen barrier, until recently. The Scientific point to be noted here is the ‘Barzak’ - not the sweet and the salt water.

miracle or no? lying or no? right or wrong?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
HomoErectus
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Posts: 332


Location: Germany
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dear Ishaq

A "barrier" between them... and... "they do not mix"... ?

Watch any river flowing into the sea, you will see they do mix.

It is true that somhow, by current movement, there are some pockets of sweet-water in salt-water, but only for a short time, till the next current comes and dissolves all into each other, no "barrier" !

We know that there are places [sea] where the water is more salty than in other places...

I don't really understand your question here...

What is so sensational in this, the quran mentioning sweet- and salt-water ?
Are you aware that people have been sailing the seven seas since EVER... people of all races and colors, places and time !

So, WHAT is new in this - the alleged "barrier" ?

Maybe you ought to look up historical texts from the GREEKS, or Phoenicians, Aegyptians, Berbers, let alone the Chinese, South-Sea-Islands, Kanaks, etc... I'm sure you will find plenty of stuff that will surprise you, because of the "modernity" displayed in those texts... maybe 1000 years [or more] older than the quran !

Are you still looking for miracles ?

There are none !

There is not even just one tiny little "miracle" left, in support of mohammad and the quran...

Socalled "miracles" will not prove it right !

Look, we all know that plenty of knowledge has been transported, via the caravan routes, the silk-road, and via ships coming and going...
some of the claimed "islamic science" came this way, was adopted, and later on claimed to be "islamic"... look how advanced the egyptian medics had been, long long before the advent of islam !

We might as well open a thread dealing with these alleged "islamic" scientific inventions, knowledge, and "contributions" !

Now, nobody denies that islamic societies had some great thinkers, scientists, and people with other skills - in their rather "open" phase... but after tightening the screws of islam, not much happened anymore...

And THAT is truely THE sadest part of the history of islam - for now about 1000 years the thinkers and other bright minds have been suppressed and silenced !
_________________
Upright is better than bent-over !
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Tvebak
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 23 Nov 2007
Posts: 280


Location: Around
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 12:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Shaq

First of all, I think all of these "miracle-interpretation" is extremly overestimated. You have a little sentence, which you try to make all sort of things come out of it. But you have a few verses in the quran which is more precise, but still extremely vague and obscure. These about "barrier between water" is one of them, and the quran is failing on the subject.

Is your conundrum concerning 'barzak', which as far as I know is used 3 times in the Quran.

23.100, 55.20, 25.53. I will try to go with what Naik have to say.

Quote:
Between them there is barrier, which is forbidden to be trespassed.’ Previously the commentators of the Qur’an wondered…‘What does the Qur’an mean? We know about sweet and salt water - But between them there is a barrier - though they meet do not mix.
...
And Dr. William Campbell writes in his book that…‘It is an observable phenomena. The fisherman of that time knew there were two types of water… salt and sweet So Prophet Mohammed during an expedition to Syria, he may have gone in the sea, or he might have spoken to these fishermen.’ Sweet and salt water is an observable phenomenon, I agree -


Well at least he admits that this is logically observable. That's great I've had discussions with believers who argued that people at that time could not have thought about a barrier between "salt" and "fresh" water. The logic is straightforward, but it is still wrong, because there's constant transgress through what these "miracle"-inventors want to be "the barrier". So I will not argue why it is a straightforward logic.

Then what is it exactly that Naik wants to be a "miracle"?

Quote:
Today after advancement of Oceanology, we have come to know, that whenever one type of water flows into the other type of water, it looses its constituents, and gets homogenized into the water it flows. There is a slanting homogenizing area, which the Qur’an refers to as ‘Barzak’  ‘unseen barrier’ And this has been agreed upon by several Scientists, even of America, by the name of Dr. Hay - he is an Oceanologist.
...
- But people did not know that there was an unseen barrier, until recently. The Scientific point to be noted here is the ‘Barzak’ - not the sweet and the salt water.


So here comes the claim. First of all I don't know wether "barzak" means an "unseen barrier" or just a "barrier" (unseen or not), but if Naik wants to promote the idea of "unseen" then he makes yet another wrong turn, cause these barriers which I think he is refering to, called (somethin)-line (fx. halocline), can in fact be very much visible, ie. you and I can see them. If you look up some on "halocline" which is a vertical line and something on diving you will find some interesting information on the matter. Anyways if he wants it to be "unseen" then, as I see it, he has yet another problem, cause then we should not be able to see it or "prove" it, because then it should only be "god" who knows it...

But anyways to the other matter of the claim, he talks about the "homogenizing area". What he wants to talks about here is probably narrow  (more or less, it differs) area between (the (something)-lines) the "pockets of water" there is, where less salty water becomes more salty or vice versa. So what he wants to argue is that the "water" changes it "salinity" and is therefore no longer a "part" of the "water" it used to belong to. This is indeed a far-far fetched manipulation of the verse to try to make the quran be compatible with science. The quran very simply and very clearly states there's no "transgress", a "partition forbidden to pass" etc. This is an important issue where the quran fails miserable.

Anyways, it is true that there's different "pockets of water" in a lake or in the sea which don't makes a completely mixed water, but there's still constant transgress between the different levels of salinity and the salinity of the "pockets" change over time and some "breaks" down and mix with others. But this is not what the quran is talking about; "one is sweet" = river and another is "brine and bitter" = sea. And besides it is also true that a completely mix is happening all the time, ie. "two bodies of water meeting eachother and MIXING, without any barrier with no transgress".

Naik is trying to find a way to "wriggle" out of the fact that there's nothing "miracilous" about the verses and that they are actually wrong on the matter. Besides the verses is also wrong on the matter that there's "two bodies" of water. There's many. Look up salinity of water. Last I would not recommend you to drink of the "palable water" as the quran recommends you to.

Cheers

PS. Again this "profession" of making obscure old books, with obscure ambigous verses, look like "science" has an extremely vague ground to work on, and the believers will manipulate and change the meanings to make it fit. And if "science" changes its opinion on a matter, then the believers will try to find a way of making the verses go along. I have thought of trying to make the same "profession" with the Iliad and Odyssey and se wether I can "predict" a whole bunch of "modern science". But then again I would feel it was a waste of my time and the horror would be if some persons would actually take my arguments serious and begin to adhere to the old greek religion of Zeus, Afrodite, Athena and such.


_________________
Yes, we have a "soul"; but it's made of lots of tiny robots. - Daniel Dennet

It's mine "." ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FREE FAITH, EXPRESSION AND THOUGHT Forum Index -> The Qur'an All times are GMT + 11 Hours
Page 1 of 1
 
 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum