New Posts For Thread: Quranic integrity and history.http://community.beliefnet.com/go/thread/view/43851/26666821/Quranic_integrity_and_history.Assuming the literal Word of God can do so, if Quran makes a historical inaccuracy, does that harm its integrity?we are now over in a dedicated thread about mountains so see my answer therehttp://community.beliefnet.com/go/thread/view/43851/26666821/Quranic_integrity_and_history.?post_id=487624645#487624645we are now over in a dedicated thread about mountains so see my answer thereTue, 01 Mar 2011 13:59:29 -0600Again, according to science itself, mountains help to balance the earth's surface and prevent it from shaking. Meaning that if there were no mountains, the earth's surface would shake, whether there is an "earthquake" or not. It would have no stabilihttp://community.beliefnet.com/go/thread/view/43851/26666821/Quranic_integrity_and_history.?post_id=487504841#487504841Again, according to science itself, mountains help to balance the earth's surface and prevent it from shaking. Meaning that if there were no mountains, the earth's surface would shake, whether there is an "earthquake" or not. It would have no stabiliMon, 28 Feb 2011 12:22:19 -0600Your reference to "earthquakes" has no relevance, as the verse does not state that mountains prevent the natural phenomenon known as an earthquake. So what do you mean by "stabilise" then?http://community.beliefnet.com/go/thread/view/43851/26666821/Quranic_integrity_and_history.?post_id=487390253#487390253Your reference to "earthquakes" has no relevance, as the verse does not state that mountains prevent the natural phenomenon known as an earthquake. So what do you mean by "stabilise" then?Sun, 27 Feb 2011 12:30:54 -0600Well there does seem to be a principle in geology called isostacy, but its nothing to do with pegs or stabilising the earth. The crust may be thicker under mountains, but there are no pegs, and the crust still moves (thats why we have mountains, behttp://community.beliefnet.com/go/thread/view/43851/26666821/Quranic_integrity_and_history.?post_id=487390065#487390065Well there does seem to be a principle in geology called isostacy, but its nothing to do with pegs or stabilising the earth. The crust may be thicker under mountains, but there are no pegs, and the crust still moves (thats why we have mountains, beSun, 27 Feb 2011 12:29:12 -0600Again, the science is called isostasy, as explained in any geology book relating to the subject. The qur'an refers to mountains stabilizing the earth's surface, which is a scientific fact. Your reference to "earthquakes" has no relevance, as the vershttp://community.beliefnet.com/go/thread/view/43851/26666821/Quranic_integrity_and_history.?post_id=487309361#487309361Again, the science is called isostasy, as explained in any geology book relating to the subject. The qur'an refers to mountains stabilizing the earth's surface, which is a scientific fact. Your reference to "earthquakes" has no relevance, as the versSat, 26 Feb 2011 16:30:05 -0600In what way is it in accordance with mofdern science. In science you make predictions which can be tested, there is noway to test this short of making another planet without mountains. Look at the news - New Zealand - plenty of mountains - one big ehttp://community.beliefnet.com/go/thread/view/43851/26666821/Quranic_integrity_and_history.?post_id=487298965#487298965In what way is it in accordance with mofdern science. In science you make predictions which can be tested, there is noway to test this short of making another planet without mountains. Look at the news - New Zealand - plenty of mountains - one big eSat, 26 Feb 2011 14:25:16 -0600There were several scientific problems raised with the explanation given on creation in your link, BD, and I'm convinced that this author was playing with numbers to reconcile Quranic creation and "proven" science (BB and the like to an extent theorehttp://community.beliefnet.com/go/thread/view/43851/26666821/Quranic_integrity_and_history.?post_id=487020537#487020537There were several scientific problems raised with the explanation given on creation in your link, BD, and I'm convinced that this author was playing with numbers to reconcile Quranic creation and "proven" science (BB and the like to an extent theoreThu, 24 Feb 2011 06:38:49 -0600Well, since you bring up science:www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/SKM/contra...If the Quran's "science" contradicts modern science, does that harm Quranic integrity?[/quote]>>>>>>>> Actually Qur'an does NOT contradicts with modern "Proven" science. Thehttp://community.beliefnet.com/go/thread/view/43851/26666821/Quranic_integrity_and_history.?post_id=486514325#486514325Well, since you bring up science:www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/SKM/contra...If the Quran's "science" contradicts modern science, does that harm Quranic integrity?[/quote]>>>>>>>> Actually Qur'an does NOT contradicts with modern "Proven" science. TheSat, 19 Feb 2011 15:48:05 -0600This is according to modern science. So why do you question whether or not mountains stabilizing the earth's surface is true? Do you disagree with modern science?I am not a scientists in this field so I can not tell you as of now how to test it. I'mhttp://community.beliefnet.com/go/thread/view/43851/26666821/Quranic_integrity_and_history.?post_id=486279045#486279045This is according to modern science. So why do you question whether or not mountains stabilizing the earth's surface is true? Do you disagree with modern science?I am not a scientists in this field so I can not tell you as of now how to test it. I'mThu, 17 Feb 2011 15:16:21 -0600how would you test this? You say its mountains that stop the earth shaking or moving, but it doesn't seem to shake any more or less in areas where there arent mountains, so there is doesn't seem to be a way of testing independantly that what you sayhttp://community.beliefnet.com/go/thread/view/43851/26666821/Quranic_integrity_and_history.?post_id=486272389#486272389how would you test this? You say its mountains that stop the earth shaking or moving, but it doesn't seem to shake any more or less in areas where there arent mountains, so there is doesn't seem to be a way of testing independantly that what you sayThu, 17 Feb 2011 14:29:44 -0600