Maybe I worded it wrong beforehand. Science doesn't lie 100% of the time, as there is stuff like the way that female wombs work and plants and stuff that they are telling the truth about. However, the Sun orbiting the Earth, Big Bang Theory and Evolution are just a few things that scientists are lying about, and I am very sure that there is way more that they are lying about, so I won't believe them 100% of the time. Especially if Allah has evidence Himself as the Creator of All Things, showing that they are lying.
The Sun orbits the Earth, and the Moon does too.
- Thread starter lilmoon
- Start date
listen, you people who claim this bizarre idea that the earth revolves around the sun (audubillah).... I don't have time to keep going back and forth with you and your strange theory.
I leave you with a stern look of disapproval.
I leave you with a stern look of disapproval.
The problem is the Quran doesn't explicitly state the sun orbits around the earth from the perspective that science is talking about. Whos to say the earth doesn't orbit the sun and the sun also orbits the earth but Allah is just talking about it from a different perspective.
The point is you cannot say scientists are lying without fully proving from tafseer that Allah says the Sun moves around the earth and orbits it.
Ibn Baz lost his eyesight at age 20, and he was very much able to move, so of course it wouldn't affect him as he had 20 years of eyesight and he was capable of movement. And knowledge does not require eyesight. People are very much capable of being able to learn things fully and become knowledgeable in things. Even that gaal scientist Stephen Hawking was talking through a computer and was crippled from age 20-something, but people still took knowledge from him and no one said his knowledge was flawed because he couldn't even talk. Ibn Baz would have fully understood everything he was saying because he has the knowledge to support that, and he learned. And modern day students of knowledge's opinions cannot be taken over the major scholars, unless the scholars said a clear lie/evil.
Same bro, I have the stern look of disapproval plus the constant gavel banging.
If you saw 2 circles one was completely still, and the other was moving back and forth around the other circle,from your perspective, which would be moving and which one would be still?
Lets say square A is circle is still and circle B is moving around circle A.
From your perspective you would say Circle B is moving around circle A.
Now lets say you were placed on circle A, you would obviously say that B looks to be moving around circle A.
If you were placed on circle B, you would say it seems like Circle A is moving around circle B.
Now without getting too complex, each one of these perspectives is a valid perspective, but cannot be said that either one is the objective perspective as each of them are subjective.
Your birds eye view of both circles is subjective, as you made circle A the frame of reference for which you will observe what goes around it,
but now lets imagine you make circle B your frame of reference from birds eye view from circle A, now it would look like circle A is moving around circle B.
If you don't understand what I'm on about, you may have to draw a circle on a piece of paper. I'm getting deep into this so you understand the semantics of language and what I am trying to say.
The circle, in reference to the paper is still, movement, without a point of reference, is just a still object, if I look at a circle, without its surroundings, it could be moving, but I wouldn't be able to see it.
I need a still location, and I need an object, now in reference to that location, I need to see how he object moves around it, then I say it moves, but now lets say I make the circle my point of reference, and the paper my object, now the circle that seemed to be moving around the paper, the paper seems to be moving around the circle.
Now we can attach this back to our original example, in actual fact, all conclusions are correct.
When the scientists of the past thought everything revolved around the earth, the problem is they claimed everything revolves around the earth from our perspective, it is completely wrong. Now to say the sun revolves around the earth from our perspective is completely right as it does.
When a modern day scientist says the earth revolves around the sun, he is changing his point of reference to the sun or the galaxy, and from that reference point we can see the earth revolves around the sun.
Now both conclusions can be correct at the same time as they do not contradict each other, it is merely a matter of perspective and different ideas being conveyed.
The Quran was sent down for us, from a human perspective Allah wants us to understand he subjected everything for us, you can therefore believe both, that the sun revolves around us, and we revolve around the sun.
Forcing your interpretation that the Sun moves around us from both our and the perspective of the sun is wrong because their is not enough Islamic evidence to prove this conclusion correct
Last edited:
I'm talking about being able to understand motion of things round each other
Well he could understand that, just like me and you. It isn't hard as we don't need to see the sun to know.
if u do not see something moving around something else being able to articulate movement of 2 objects around each other would be more difficult
They did find dinosaur fossils back in the old days, because of ignorance they called them Dragons, Leviathan, Cyclops and other made up beasts.....
But we don't see the Sun move around the Earth directly, but we can still imagine it.
we do
So you have entered space and seen the movements of the Sun specifically?
Can you give one specific example? where are the dragon bones?
we have photos from space
How about thinking the possibility that Sun, Earth, and Moon have each orbit? The moon is orbiting around Earth, and Earth revolves around the Sun while the Sun is travelling in its orbit. That's theory that could make sense. Check the theory; it's helical model aka vortex helicocentric.
Either way, Allah SWT's words are absolute and none of us can find true interpretation in it except what we can understand according to our competence.
Either way, Allah SWT's words are absolute and none of us can find true interpretation in it except what we can understand according to our competence.
“I don’t believe those that teach Lucy evolutionary and the moon landing..That which I can’t verify myself is automatically false until otherwise proven beyond doubt!”
-Whitehartlane
-Whitehartlane
Trending
-
-
-
The Far Right Crashing Out Over MN Mayor Speaking Somali- Started by Keep it a boqol
- Replies: 25
Latest posts
-
-
Two Indians steal Gold worth $30k in Hargeisa And they flee from the country- Latest: Barkhadle1520
-
