Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
al-amiyr

The Qur'aan Cosmological Model

276 posts in this topic

A bit of a short memory? I asked if you had an example of using the equation, your reply

Yes! I have made a thread " The Qur'aan Lexicographical Model:". Have a look at it.

And if you need to be reminded of your credibility (or lack there of), just look at this thread. The only people advocating your "theory" are those who lack understanding of basic algebra.

I dont think anyone has advocated his theory, not even me. All I have done is correct people assumptions on the linguistic side of things, science and philosophical aspects.

I for one am very interested in his theory but I will analyse it critically when I'm familiar with it all, for now I'm enjoying the read and wish Al-Amiyr carries on posting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

I am still hoping that there will be some posters who will answer the question that I have asked earlier so that we could proceed knowing that we are still on the right track. For now just ask questions relating to the subject.

You can refer back to the following posts to post #1 #8 #9 #12 #19 #22 #23 #26 #27 #58 and #61

Here is the question that I asked earlier.

Read the following again. It is important. It is the first QCM verse that will take us into the Qur'aan Cosmological model. Its understanding is important.

Very interesting....so what you are saying is thar Quran is referencing not directly but through deeper meaning and reflection of the verses that the current existence ie universe came in to existence as a result of a previous collapsed universe which was caused by Allah to be return to it's to state of singularity (ratqan), for then Allah to cause it to expand again creating the current creation. I think it's plausible but there a few problems in my opinion.

Any remenants of a collapsed universe would mean that a physical plane existed prior to our singularity, therefore science such as physics should not breakdown at the singularity, because physics works from physical plane to another, we call the observations laws of physics, yet how do you explain the breakdown?

Second question, based on your theory, what was the cause of our universes creation ie expansion? God or the collapsed universe?

(I'm applying philosophy to you theory, see how it goes)

More to come later I need to absorb your theory more I think :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting....so what you are saying is thar Quran is referencing not directly but through deeper meaning and reflection of the verses that the current existence ie universe came in to existence as a result of a previous collapsed universe which was caused by Allah to be return to it's to state of singularity (ratqan), for then Allah to cause it to expand again creating the current creation. I think it's plausible but there a few problems in my opinion.

Any remenants of a collapsed universe would mean that a physical plane existed prior to our singularity, therefore science such as physics should not breakdown at the singularity, because physics works from physical plane to another, we call the observations laws of physics, yet how do you explain the breakdown?

Second question, based on your theory, what was the cause of our universes creation ie expansion? God or the collapsed universe?

(I'm applying philosophy to you theory, see how it goes)

More to come later I need to absorb your theory more I think :)

For now can you answer the question I posed in order to continue deeper into the model? It is very important.

1)- What is the Ratqan?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously Alien I genuinely don't mean to offend or belittle you or anyone. I enjoy our debates and everyone here knows that I always bring philosophy in to scientific debates, I do so because most people don't understand that scientific theories are rejected or accepted based on philosophical reasonings and alignment. For example all the empirical data showing us that we live in a heliocentric solar system can be interpreted to create a geo centric model showing earth at the centre of the solar system and the universe. We reject the latter on philosophical basis alone!

In a geocentric system, with the Sun and the rest of the planets orbiting the Earth, those planets, such as Mercury, that are closer to the Earth than the Sun would never be seen to pass behind the Sun as they are inside it's orbit. Since we can observe that Mercury does in fact pass behind the Sun, it refutes the geocentric model.

Thus it is a scientific basis and not a philosophical basis that allows us to reject the geocentric model

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For now can you answer the question I posed in order to continue deeper into the model? It is very important.

1)- What is the Ratqan?

The coming together of something, and the consequent infusion into a single entity ..OR total darkness

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm gonna keep it simple, established facts are that through observations and other collected data we know the universe began, it started with a singularity appearing which expanded. These are established facts discovered in the 20th century. The Quran gives this detail and more, some of which is still be to be discovered.

Now based on the established on the facts, anything proposing a cause even god, is dealing with metaphysical aspects which has no empirical proof, therefore can only be reasoned for.

Based on established facts and according to hawkings and others I quoted, say that time, space, sum of all matter began with expansion of the singularity, prior to this nothing existed. Nothing meaning, we dont know what was before or what caused it, nothing logically cannot be the cause, because from nothing we get nothing.

Now to the vacuum, there was no vacuum prior to singularity, the vacuum space time matter all came into existence at the bigbang. You see scientists have been desperately trying to prove that matter can arise from nothing, although everything contrary in science, observation, causality, and experience show otherwise. The holy grail for them was the vacuum which was deemed to closest thing to nothing if not nothing. They found that sub atomic particles came into existence and disappeared. Where did they come from and go, they proposed that this evidence that something can come from nothing! However this was then destroyed when they realised that vacuum is not nothing, it's a rich structure of fluctuating energy (ie consisting of matter whether visible or not, ie sub atomic which is still matter), from which these particles came into existence and vanished with the fluctuations. So for anyone to propose that matter existed in form of a vacuum within which a singularity appeared or caused it to appear is a logical fallacy, cause the sum of all matter is the universe, the vacuum is a part of it and came into existence too, to suggest otherwise is to suggest that universe created itself, another fallacy, how can something exist and not exist at the same time? Plus it would suggest that there is a physical plane beyond the singularity, if so then we should be able to reach it so to speak, our physics would not breakdown at singularity as there would be another physical plane they would function on therefore observable.

Hence why I am saying that I make an argument based on established facts, the counter are all theories which are good in their own right but lack proof and breakdown when philosophically and critically analysed.

:)

Im not arguing with you about most of that. I agree with most of it. There is no logical fallacy. Lumping vacuum energy in with rest is the fallacy here. There is not a single reason to do so. not one. It's fallacious to ride along with what scientists say about visible matter and apply it to the vacuume. We think we know that the stuff of the universe was once united. But again lion there is nothing that says that vaccume itself was inside of that singularity... It is possible and I think likely that the vacume was here prior.

You know better than anyone to not make assumptions like that. the face of the deep most likely preceded the moment of creation.

By the way the inflationary model assumes the existence of vacuum energy prior to the bb. In fact the bubble itself is an expanding bundle of vacuume energy.

http://www.superstringtheory.com/cosmo/cosmo41.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The coming together of something, and the consequent infusion into a single entity ..OR total darkness

100%! Perfect answer. It seems like no one wanted to answer the question. I thought that I was going to sit on this rock all day.

Now the word Ratqan comes from the Arabic root word Rataqa. In Arabic there are only three short vowels a and i and u ;which can be lengthened to aa and iy and uw. There are 28 consonants representing exactly 28 sounds. There are no deviations. Arabic differs from English. Arabic, like Hebrew, is based on Root Letters but even more simpler and precise. Over 80% of the spoken Arabic are based on the following pattern.

Xa X- Xa X = any consonant eg ( b s m l r t q etc.). The dash - = any of the three short vowels a i u .

If I said substitute L for X then

Xa X- Xa = LaLaLa or = LaLiLa or = LaLuLa

All of those are verbs of the past tense. There are only five basic verbal patterns. These verbal patters change according to rules to become the entire language. That is why I have started The Qur'aan Lexicographical Model thread to explain this structure of Arabic. It takes about 15 minutes to understand.

Have a look at The Qur'aan Lexicographical Model Verbal Word Program below. I am going to start explaining it in that forum from tomorrow. Do not be dismayed if it is not fully grasped now. If you applied the above rules then there will be no problem for you to work it out. It is just like a lovely puzzle. I have taught it to many five year olds and they grasped it easily. Remember the Xs = any consonant. a = a ; i = i ; u = u and the dash - = a or i or u.

  1. If you want to give it a go now just fill (replace the xs with consonants) in the sections that are numbered from 1 - 5.

The Program that generates all the Arabic Root Verbs. Read the notes below.

lexmod1.png

In the next post I shall further elaborate on Ratqan and its verbal rootrataqa. The an at the end of Ratqan is just a grammatical rule that may or may not be pronounced.

To be continued inshaa allaah (if God had willed).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a geocentric system, with the Sun and the rest of the planets orbiting the Earth, those planets, such as Mercury, that are closer to the Earth than the Sun would never be seen to pass behind the Sun as they are inside it's orbit. Since we can observe that Mercury does in fact pass behind the Sun, it refutes the geocentric model.

Thus it is a scientific basis and not a philosophical basis that allows us to reject the geocentric model

Internationally renown Astrophysicist George F. R. Ellis explains: "People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations….For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations….You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds. In my view there is absolutely nothing wrong in that. What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that."

W. Wayt Gibbs, "Profile: George F. R. Ellis," Scientific American, October 1995, Vol. 273, No.4, p. 55.

Clearly you don't know what you're talking about nor did you actually understand my point, I hope the expert above hits it home :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Internationally renown Astrophysicist George F. R. Ellis explains: "People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations….For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations….You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds. In my view there is absolutely nothing wrong in that. What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that."

W. Wayt Gibbs, "Profile: George F. R. Ellis," Scientific American, October 1995, Vol. 273, No.4, p. 55.

Clearly you don't know what you're talking about nor did you actually understand my point, I hope the expert above hits it home :)

Why the continuation of irrelevant discussions in this thread when I have already asked nicely via PM not to do so because it is creating distractions.

I have basically slowed down my own posting because of this. Initially I said it was fine. Now and then a little deviation is welcoming e.g. like aiming to hit the mark for humor. Strike what I present here and break it down. Then all can learn. Thanks!

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why the continuation of irrelevant discussions in this thread when I have already asked nicely via PM not to do so because it is creating distractions.

I have basically slowed down my own posting because of this. Initially I said it was fine. Now and then a little deviation is welcoming e.g. like aiming to hit the mark for humor. Strike what I present here and break it down. Then all can learn. Thanks!

Yes, he has a tendency to address issues that are irrelevant to what is actually being discussed, hence why I stopped responding to his posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why the continuation of irrelevant discussions in this thread when I have already asked nicely via PM not to do so because it is creating distractions.

I have basically slowed down my own posting because of this. Initially I said it was fine. Now and then a little deviation is welcoming e.g. like aiming to hit the mark for humor. Strike what I present here and break it down. Then all can learn. Thanks!

Just skip them, treat it like white noise and block it out lol and continue on with what you are doing.. I for one am still reading.. And throw in a few more questions..get things moving along

Edited by Beckys_Mom
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let us again have a look at the first of the two Qur'aan Cosmological Model verses upon which the Qur'aan Cosmological Model is based.

- - -

The Qur'aan 021:030

"Have those who have disbelieved now not seen:-

that the samaawaat and the ‘arD

(1)- were both Ratqan

(2)- and so We Fataq them both again.

And We made from al-maa' (the water) every living thing.

Will they now not believe?"

- - -

As has already been said that this verse contains an encyclopedia of information of which only the cosmological parts will be touched upon. To do that we shall simply extract the parts of the verse that I have already made bold. Let us read the extracted parts.

that the samaawaat and the ‘arD

(1)- were both Ratqan

(2)- and so We Fataq them both again.

As you have seen, the cosmological parts of the verse comprise three phrases: The first - that the samaawaat and the ‘arD; the second - were both Ratqan; and the third - and so We Fataq them both again. From the analyses of the Arabic language and the clear descriptions of the use of the two words in many other places in the Qur'aan, the samaawaat and the ‘arD simply means the whole realm of the universe; i.e. the sun, moon, stars and all other extra-terrestrial phenomena as well as the earth.

The verse continues and say that this whole realm of the universe; i.e. the sun, moon, stars and all other extra-terrestrial phenomena as well as the earth were both Ratqan (i.e. a thingbrought together; sewn together, stitched up, closed up and with no spaces between the parts). Those are the meanings of the the Qur'aan Cosmological Model technical term Ratqan. If you wish you may just say Ratq because the an at the end of it is an Arabic grammatical rule that indicates that the word is an object of the previous verb.I have left it as Ratqan for easier pronunciation. Also observe that I have enlarged the initial letter of the R ofRatqan. The reason is to show distinction because the initial letters of the major phases of the creation according to the Qur'aan Cosmological Model also serves as the important abbreviations of the Qur'aan Cosmological Model Algorithmic Compression Kh = +T +R +F +2T +2R +2F.

It will be seen that when we run this Qur’aanic cosmological algorithmic compression Kh = T +R +F +2T +2R +2F through the fundamental structure of the Arabic language which is The Qur'aan Lexicographical Model then we witness a magnificent display of verbs, nouns, and adjectives that go back to describe each and every phase of the universe at its exact time and place in great detail.

We are presented without exaggeration hundreds of beautiful informative illustrations of the phases the universe underwent, undergo and will undergo from its cosmological origin, through its cosmological evolution, and until its eventual cosmological end.

And upon that we also see the derivation of many simple and logical abbreviations that precisely describe each and every phase of the universe. And then further beyond that we realize and see how the actions of the universe drive life into the dead and empty of meaning fundamental building blocks of the language- which are all the fundamental verbal patterns from which are derived the words of the language. In other words when you have learned this program then you would be able to know the meanings of many of the words of the Qur'aanic Arabic language by simple calculation that can then be verified in an authoritative Arabic dictionary. Does that sound unbelievable? Summon the arrows for rest and move the mind to find the target.

Ratq to be continued inshaa allaah (if God had willed).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just skip them, treat it like white noise and block it out lol and continue on with what you are doing.. I for one am still reading.. And throw in a few more questions..get things moving along

Sitting now here at the computer for almost 18 hours (6 non stop). Typing everything via two fingers. Did about 10 illustrations. I love my critics to be experts. They are the ones who in the end will make meaningful contributions. On this journey there will be nothing that will not be encountered. The QCM is only the dot of the beginning and only a dot was presented so far. The new movement will have to be begun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Beautiful Middle Earth Cape Town: Where Rises Table Mountain In The Garden Of The Earth.

cape1.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well second reading through startling to get it more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well second reading through startling to get it more.

Every time you read it over again it will become even clearer. Remember there are still many points I must clarify but I cannot do it all at once. We are going to get to very interesting matters. You will become astounded when you see how in great detail these two QCM verses are going to take us. In my next QCM post I am clarifying why the Qur'aan says "that the samaawaat and the ‘arD were both Ratqan and so We Fataq them both again."? The best thing to do is take some notes and learn the terms.

Another thing is that I have been wondering from the day I entered this forum a few days ago about your chosen avatar. What does it signify? Is it representing a spider web with two living creatures in it blocking the way to a secret place. I am just wondering. Can you tell me more?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every time you read it over again it will become even clearer. Remember there are still many points I must clarify but I cannot do it all at once. We are going to get to very interesting matters. You will become astounded when you see how in great detail these two QCM verses are going to take us. In my next QCM post I am clarifying why the Qur'aan says "that the samaawaat and the ‘arD were both Ratqan and so We Fataq them both again."? The best thing to do is take some notes and learn the terms.

Another thing is that I have been wondering from the day I entered this forum a few days ago about your chosen avatar. What does it signify? Is it representing a spider web with two living creatures in it blocking the way to a secret place. I am just wondering. Can you tell me more?

It's a native American dream catcher.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreamcatcher#section_1

I haven't chosen a particular inturpretation, but for me the interconnected lines have meaning about the interconnection of all things in creation.

I'm also what some might call a dreamer. So the corolation of the web that catches dreams has meaning for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why the continuation of irrelevant discussions in this thread when I have already asked nicely via PM not to do so because it is creating distractions.

I have basically slowed down my own posting because of this. Initially I said it was fine. Now and then a little deviation is welcoming e.g. like aiming to hit the mark for humor. Strike what I present here and break it down. Then all can learn. Thanks!

Irrelevant? I don't think so, not entirely. You brought up this thread with a cosmological model theorised from quranic verses. Initially the responses were that your flawed, or counter arguments came connected with theories not based on established facts. I've been filtering that out, pointing out the logical flaws and philosophical flaws.

I will apply the same to your theory, hence my questions.

Rattan, as I said was unification of mass it's reference to the singularity, is it not? So I answered it now you answer my questions please.

I will stick to the topic, although I was blamed for the tangent :(

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Irrelevant? I don't think so, not entirely. You brought up this thread with a cosmological model theorised from quranic verses. Initially the responses were that your flawed, or counter arguments came connected with theories not based on established facts. I've been filtering that out, pointing out the logical flaws and philosophical flaws.

I will apply the same to your theory, hence my questions.

Rattan, as I said was unification of mass it's reference to the singularity, is it not? So I answered it now you answer my questions please.

I will stick to the topic, although I was blamed for the tangent :(

Do not take it seriously! You are still the best. I missed your presence yesterday .You made the most contributions and all worthy of consideration. But I saw how others also distracted you and I thought that I will rather fight with my good friend than with others. Now he can turn all his roaring Lion energies to tear apart this QCM. Like it is written in the Qur'aan and I quote,

"And what is the matter with them that they flee from the guidance? As if they are donkeys fleeing from a Lion."

I will reply later to your questions. Just finishing something else. Please go to the thread The Qur'aan Lexicographical model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do not take it seriously! You are still the best. I missed your presence yesterday .You made the most contributions and all worthy of consideration. But I saw how others also distracted you and I thought that I will rather fight with my good friend than with others. Now he can turn all his roaring Lion energies to tear apart this QCM. Like it is written in the Qur'aan and I quote,

"And what is the matter with them that they flee from the guidance? As if they are donkeys fleeing from a Lion."

I will reply later to your questions. Just finishing something else. Please go to the thread The Qur'aan Lexicographical model.

Your words are too kind brother and I am really enjoying your intelligent eloquent posts. Keep them going and I will stick to the topic and help where it's possible and correct :)

I have no wish to tear the QCM apart brother, but by nature I am critical and analytical the very same approach that brought me to islam in the first place and adopt this way of life. I don't wish to tear anything apart I just like to approach things critically. Critical thinking is lacking in the world today, most people have dumbed themselves down to accept what they see hear smell taste, told, reported, theories, religious dogma, etc etc blindly and easily. I'm just cautious maybe too much lol ;)

I'm reading the other thread too, takes more to digest though, alot of information.....don't worry I'm following both. I do disappear for sometime due to work etc, but always return, inshallah :)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can refer back to the following posts #1 #8 #9 #12 #19 #22 #23 #26 #27 #58 #61 #71#139 #157 and 162.

A very important point not to forget.

Why does the Qur'aan state the cosmological facts as follows:

"that the samaawaat and the ‘arD were both Ratqan fa (and so) We Fataq them both again."?

Because of the manner in which the Qur'aan stated the cosmological facts the following two questions spring to mind:

1)- does the Qur'aan say that the ‘arD is a separate and unique entity in the Universe?

2)- does the Qur'aan say that the ‘arD was already in existence at the birth of the Universe?

If we look at the Qur'aanic verse and even examine it a little more deeper it would appear as if the Qur'aan is actually saying that. But that perception or conclusion is not exactly true. And it is because of this inaccurate conclusion of the lack of the proper understanding of the correct meaning of the verse that all the confusion begins and then all sorts of wild statements are made by those who claim the Qur'aan to be scientific and those who assert that it is not.

And it is also because of this inaccurate conclusion that has led to the confusion which caused the Muslim scholars to deliberately falsify the translations by removing or not including the word 'both' from or in the actual translation of the original verb which is in the dual form.

In other words the Qur'aan states 'kaanataa' 'both of them were' or 'the two of them were' or 'they two were' and then the translators took it upon themselves to transform it into 'they were' or 'were'. That is why it is sacrilegious to translate the Books of ALLAAH into other languages without providing detailed explanations.

Of the approximately seventy Qur'aan translations that I have examined so far I have found only two translations which have faithfully included the dual in their translations. Not to say that the other parts of their translations are not without gave errors. It will surprise many that both of these translations that translated the verse correctly with the dual included were not made by Muslim translators but by surprisingly by non Muslim ones. In my opinion it would not be going too far to say that a common trait in man is that he loves to exaggerate when it suites him and he loves to hang on and to invent or follow explanations to that of which he knows little or nothing of.

Let us now examine precisely what the Qur'aan is exactly saying. It is well worth mentioning that when one has sufficiently studied the Qur'aan and the other important teachings of the Prophet (S+) one will immediately know that this verse is referring to three things simultaneously. In other words three different independent matters are being discussed providing the reader with factual information for observation and consideration.

Let us see what it is!

1)- the samaawaat

2)- the ‘arD

3)- the samaawaat and the ‘arD

To understand this better let us make a comparison with something else: 'the school and the principal were both famous'

There are three clear possibilities of understanding what was said.

1)- the school

2)- the principal

3)- the school and the principal

In the first example it is referring to the whole school; the students; the teachers; and the principal. There was none that was specifically famous; none that stood out from the rest. Just the whole school that was famous.

In the second example it is referring only to the principal; not to the school as a whole; not to the students; and not to the teachers. There was only one who was specifically famous; one that stood out from the rest. And it was just the principal who was alone famous.

In the third example it is referring to the whole school generally as well as to the principal specifically. It was not only the school as a whole that was famous but also the principal who in his own right was also famous.

Likewise as in our example the same rule applies to the mentioned Qur'aanic cosmological verse. Let us see!

In the first example it is referring to the whole of space and everything that it contains including the earth which is a body moving in that space. In other words it is referring to the whole universe; i.e. the sun, the moon, the stars,the galaxies and everything else including the earth. And it says that all these entities comprising the universe were Ratqan fa (and so) Fataq (i.e. brought together as one unified entity for the purpose of breaking it apart again to form the universe).

In the second example it is referring to the earth alone and no other entity in the universe; not to the sun; not the moon; not to the stars etc. but only to the earth specifically. It says that once upon a time the earth was also Ratqan fa (and so) Fataq (i.e. brought together as one unified entity (previous continents came together to form Pangaea and then again split to form the seven continents which are still spreading apart to this day).

In the third example it is referring to both what happened in the universe as well as what happened to the earth. Both underwent their own Ratqan fa (and so) Fataq and both were part of a united Ratqan fa (and so) Fataq (i.e. the whole of space and everything that it contains including the earth were once upon a time in a state that was brought together as one unified entity for the purpose of breaking it apart again to form the universe which is in an observed accelerated expansion to this day.

So there you have it in a nutshell. A great amount of details all applying to two different phenomena simultaneously. Now I will leave you with a quotation with what the Prophet (S+) of the Qur'aan had said one thousand four hundred years ago.

The Book of Bukhari Volume 9. Book 87. Number 141

Narrated Abu Huraira: I heard Allah's Apostle saying.

"I have been sent with Jawami al-Kalim (i.e. the shortest expression carrying the widest meanings).

and

I was made victorious with awe (caste into the hearts of the enemy)

and

while I was sleeping the keys of the treasures of the earth were brought to me and were put in my hand."

Muhammad (S+) said. Jawami'-al-Kalim means that Allah expresses in one or two statements or thereabouts the numerous matters that used to be written in the books revealed before (the coming of) the Prophet .

If you need to know more about this just ask and I shall elaborate.

Ratq to be continued inshaa allaah (if God had willed).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AlAmiyr

So the verses in question when broken down to the roots describe the state of universe and everything within it coming together as a unified mass, this was then cleft asunder, separated and expanded. However the verse not only relates that but also that the earth was also unified and then separated and expanded so to speak into the continents. Wow that's amazing, so much depth in such few words. Reminds of a book written by an English academic who decided to study the Quran linguistically, structurally, form etc etc etc, it's an amazing piece of work, the academic became Muslim as a result as what he discovered was truly outstanding, the Quran selection of words, placement, form, structure, linguistic power, prowess, eloquence, mechanisms, etc etc were absolutely perfect in every sense. Truly beyond human or natures capacity to reproduce! I will pm you the book name one I can remember or source it again :)

Keep going

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neil Robinson

Discovering the Quran, A contemporary Approach to a veiled text.

You will enjoy I believe and information which may further help you with your theory etc

:)

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What predictions does this model make that we have not discovered yet? There in is what lies the usefulness of any theory.

Waiting till the end of time is hardly an option to see Amiyr's theory proven.

But what he said here could be proven:

Yes it does explain the brain in great detail. My niece is now one of the best brain surgeons in the world. She is only 29 years and lecture in conferences all over the world. They made a special department for her at the hospital. She has already worked on more than thirty brains herself. I have been giving her much info about the Qur'aan and the Brain over many years. I can discuss this subject in great detail. But your asking appears more like making fun other than being truly truthful about the matter.

I'd like to read more about that.

But I am only on page 5 or 6 of this thread, so it may already have been answered by Amiyr.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neil Robinson

Discovering the Quran, A contemporary Approach to a veiled text.

You will enjoy I believe and information which may further help you with your theory etc

:)

Thanks for letting me know about the book. I will try to get hold of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.