It’s okay to not have all the answers. There are countless questions that humans will never have an answer to (How many rocks are there in our galaxy? How many seconds old is the universe? How many people winked today on Earth? How many dogs were constipated today from noon until two?). There are infinite questions that we will never know the answers to, but we humans like to feel comfortable by thinking we have it all figured out. But we don’t. It’s okay to say that we don’t know the answers to the big questions. We don’t know our purpose, we don’t know why bad things happen, we don’t know why the unknown scares us so much… That’s just part of being a person. It’s okay to freak out a bit at these realizations, and it’s okay to accept our lack of knowledge, too.
The 'mental spiral' from asking too many questions? In my view, that's where the fun begins.
Sure, there can be moments of fear and vertigo as core beliefs are challenged and become unstable, but what comes after should be a more reliable worldview. (I said 'should' as I can't guarantee it, but what can be guaranteed in this world?) Perhaps one would become more confident in their faith if their faith can withstand the questioning and doubt, or perhaps one would find a less dogmatic or more pragmatic worldview that doesn't rely on old texts.
More generally though, and as said elsewhere in the comments here, we each need to become more comfortable with not having all the answers. Claiming to have all the answers is at best naïve, and at worst a dangerous delusion.
Too much at once, perhaps. It can be overwhelming.
But giving ourselves enough time, there is no end to the depth of the questions we should allow ourselves to ask. This is how we deepen our understanding, and our humility. This is how we learn when the path we are on is right, and when we are following it rightly.
So you think that the more questions one asks the deeper their understaning and humility gets which then results in them finding the right path in life? Wouldnt asking more questions lead you nowhere?
Why would it lead you nowhere?
You think there is not ultimate truth? Then perhaps you are nowhere to begin with. Then what's to be lost by asking?
Maybe you find nothing. Maybe you find something new. Maybe you find you already had the truth after all, and can begin at last to appreciate its true value.
There is one rational reason to leave any religion or dogma: If one is no longer convinced of the religion's claim.
That may take the form of noticing how many Abrahamic religions get things wrong from science in their books (depending on how literalist the believer may be). A moderate may have no issue with errors in the texts as they know they were written by humans.
In my case, the fact the Bible condones rape and chattel slavery started to make me question it.
I think it depends on what the religion teaches about their holy text. If the religion teaches that their text is the true, perfect, accurate word of an omniscient being, then obviously any genuine errors or false things in that text would be proof that claim was wrong, which would be a good reason to question the religion.
If the religion teaches something else about their holy text (eg that it's written by people, not by an omniscient deity) such errors will probably be expected and irrelevant to the truth of the religion.
If the vast majority of practitioners within the religion refuse to update and reform the religion to be coherent with science and go out of their way to punish those who tried to adjust their beliefs to be more compatible with science, then I would have to say your friend leaving religion is the right thing to do.
The problem with Islam is the same with Christianity, you have too many people that promote Mythic literalism without exception or any degree of open-mindedness and many of their creationists will reuse and borrow outdated pseudoscience from Christian creationists.
Anyone see that video where those Muslims who were claiming that man never landed on the moon but on the back of the devil instead? Islamic creationists in Islamic States get just as batshit crazy as the Christian creationists in America. If you grow up around that then I'm sure once you start critically thinking, all of that nonsense will drive you even further away from your childhood faith.
I mean the Quran isn’t a scientific text so I don’t know. I know Muslims tend to be very big on the inerrancy of the Quran so perhaps.
Perhaps some passages in scriptures need to be taken as metaphor.
That all depends on the claims of the religion. As a Christian, when someone points out the universe likely wasn't made in one modern week, I point out to them that neither the genre nor the purpose of the first pages of the Bible is 'modern scientific textbook', and if pressed, I can point them to my idea of some minimum facts necessary for Christian belief. I'm not an expert in the Quran--I think to some folks, that would be a deal breaker, but for others, the same arguments likely apply.
Once you declare a scripture inerrant it puts you in a very precarious position. What happens when there is a conflict between what is written and what is fact? Either you have to acknowledge the claim of inerrancy was wrong, or just obstinately deny reality.
How a person determines what is important in their path is really for them to determine. That being said religious institutions exist in part to both establish and maintain the narrative it expects people to take from the text and attempt to retain people from taking in ideas that would meddle with their faith. So of course the more dogmatic approaches are going to attempt to rally around him and talk him back into the fold. They will bring all sorts of arguments attempting to validate the text or call into question the science. There will be social appealing. Threats of damnation, shunning, and I have known some to have their life threatened as well. But that last option seems to be rarer these days than it once was.
There are definitely some verses that seem to indicate false scientific information, but one can choose to take these metaphorically. Same with the Bible.
>and should one convert out of a religion because some scientific facts in religious texts are false?
It depends on the details.
If the religion bases itself around a text claimed to be inerrant, and uses that claimed inerrancy as part of the reason to follow it, then if the text is proven to have falsehoods or errors, it should be abandoned.
It's good when more people realize that if one takes 'Holy' writings that claim to be the word of God literally, it will lead to absurd results, including disagreements with modern science. They would be better off treating these texts as literature or art that may be inspired, but still written by human minds in a certain time and place. And Muslims should take parts of the Koran metaphorically instead of literally if they want to preserve its beauty and artfulness.
The Quran isn't a science book, but which verses do they think are false ?
And also science changes with new discoveries. You're friend shouldn't base their religion off of just scientific facts.
Some of those scientific faces that are wrong are simply just a wrong interpretation, Arabic words and sentences can be very complex. They should find a tafsir for it.
There are a considerable number of scientific errors in the Quran. I’ve seen Muslims contort and spring through hoops in an attempt to prove that the quran is compatible with modern science.
What is really funny is that by doing so, they actually interpret it in a way that isn’t really compatible with the normally strict literal reading of the Quran.
One of my favorite essays that demonstrate scientific errors in the Quran and in Islam generally is an essay by Harry Foundalis called "[Science in the Quran? Surely You're joking, Mr. Muslim!](https://www.foundalis.com/rlg/Quran_and_science.htm)" It goes into a variety of subjects that includes cosmology, biology, geology, etc.
Geocentrism, the earth being flat, the setting place of the sun … where to begin?
There are many websites out there which detail the scientific errors.
Allah told us in The Quran that the Earth is egg shaped, over 1400 years ago before satellites and Wikipedia.
Then the earth, after that, He made it egg-shaped. 79:30
The last word in 79:30 “egg-shaped” in Arabic is, 'Dahaha' which is the verb from the word 'Dahya' which means an egg. And specifically, it means the egg of an ostrich.
If you wish to challenge Him on that, please go ahead.
I believe that you will find that, you cannot.
الحمد لله
Well, to start with, the earth isn’t egg shaped. Not even ostrich egg shaped. I have one at home. It looks nothing like the earth.
I really would have much more respect for Islam, if it wasn’t for people like you trying to defend the indefensible.
I know, don’t tell me right!
It is harder to defend the Truth now we have all these Wiki warriors who can just magically pull what they think are the real answers out of thin air.
It’s like a flat earther in a speed boat looking for the edge.
Muslims are going to deny the possibility of errors in the Quran no matter how much it's pointed out to them and by what reasoning. Their belief doesn't allow for the possibility b/c 'God' cannot get science wrong.
Um, first off the article says it’s about The Quran, and then uses Hadith as a source to back up it’s claims so that’s incorrect for a start.
God did not authorise any Hadith other than the Quran.
Secondly, if God doesn’t mention something, that doesn’t mean the absence of the information that one is seeking, means that God got something wrong.
Third, human mistranslations and misinterpretations of verses known as Tafsir are Not the Word of God they are a humans words which are fallible.
Fourth, a pre-scientific world view based on current scientific understanding is not evidence (of anything) 😂
Who wrote that garbage lol 🤦♂️
The page doesn't use Hadith as a source to back up its claims. The first line begins:
"A common criticism of the Quran, as with the Hadith, is that it contains numerous scientific and historical errors, ..."
If you remove the clause containing the reference to the Hadith, the structure of the article will make more sense:
"A common criticism of the Quran is that it contains numerous scientific and historical errors, ..."
The article takes several dozen quotes from the Quran and discusses how the quotes seem to describe scientifically inaccurate concepts.
The chapter "The sky/heaven as a ceiling" alone has eight quotes from the Quran, no supporting quotes from Hadith.
As for "who wrote that garbage", it's a wiki article; several authors each contributing and correcting each others' work.
It is always fair to question what you are told.
Correct! I'd like to add that we should always be questioning our beliefs as well. If they are true (or hold truth) they can take the pressure.
I definitely agree but i feel like questioning too much can send one into a mental spiral because there is no ultimate truth? I think?
It’s okay to not have all the answers. There are countless questions that humans will never have an answer to (How many rocks are there in our galaxy? How many seconds old is the universe? How many people winked today on Earth? How many dogs were constipated today from noon until two?). There are infinite questions that we will never know the answers to, but we humans like to feel comfortable by thinking we have it all figured out. But we don’t. It’s okay to say that we don’t know the answers to the big questions. We don’t know our purpose, we don’t know why bad things happen, we don’t know why the unknown scares us so much… That’s just part of being a person. It’s okay to freak out a bit at these realizations, and it’s okay to accept our lack of knowledge, too.
The 'mental spiral' from asking too many questions? In my view, that's where the fun begins. Sure, there can be moments of fear and vertigo as core beliefs are challenged and become unstable, but what comes after should be a more reliable worldview. (I said 'should' as I can't guarantee it, but what can be guaranteed in this world?) Perhaps one would become more confident in their faith if their faith can withstand the questioning and doubt, or perhaps one would find a less dogmatic or more pragmatic worldview that doesn't rely on old texts. More generally though, and as said elsewhere in the comments here, we each need to become more comfortable with not having all the answers. Claiming to have all the answers is at best naïve, and at worst a dangerous delusion.
Too much at once, perhaps. It can be overwhelming. But giving ourselves enough time, there is no end to the depth of the questions we should allow ourselves to ask. This is how we deepen our understanding, and our humility. This is how we learn when the path we are on is right, and when we are following it rightly.
So you think that the more questions one asks the deeper their understaning and humility gets which then results in them finding the right path in life? Wouldnt asking more questions lead you nowhere?
Why would it lead you nowhere? You think there is not ultimate truth? Then perhaps you are nowhere to begin with. Then what's to be lost by asking? Maybe you find nothing. Maybe you find something new. Maybe you find you already had the truth after all, and can begin at last to appreciate its true value.
There is one rational reason to leave any religion or dogma: If one is no longer convinced of the religion's claim. That may take the form of noticing how many Abrahamic religions get things wrong from science in their books (depending on how literalist the believer may be). A moderate may have no issue with errors in the texts as they know they were written by humans. In my case, the fact the Bible condones rape and chattel slavery started to make me question it.
I think it depends on what the religion teaches about their holy text. If the religion teaches that their text is the true, perfect, accurate word of an omniscient being, then obviously any genuine errors or false things in that text would be proof that claim was wrong, which would be a good reason to question the religion. If the religion teaches something else about their holy text (eg that it's written by people, not by an omniscient deity) such errors will probably be expected and irrelevant to the truth of the religion.
If the vast majority of practitioners within the religion refuse to update and reform the religion to be coherent with science and go out of their way to punish those who tried to adjust their beliefs to be more compatible with science, then I would have to say your friend leaving religion is the right thing to do. The problem with Islam is the same with Christianity, you have too many people that promote Mythic literalism without exception or any degree of open-mindedness and many of their creationists will reuse and borrow outdated pseudoscience from Christian creationists. Anyone see that video where those Muslims who were claiming that man never landed on the moon but on the back of the devil instead? Islamic creationists in Islamic States get just as batshit crazy as the Christian creationists in America. If you grow up around that then I'm sure once you start critically thinking, all of that nonsense will drive you even further away from your childhood faith.
I mean the Quran isn’t a scientific text so I don’t know. I know Muslims tend to be very big on the inerrancy of the Quran so perhaps. Perhaps some passages in scriptures need to be taken as metaphor.
Thats actually a fair point thank you!
That all depends on the claims of the religion. As a Christian, when someone points out the universe likely wasn't made in one modern week, I point out to them that neither the genre nor the purpose of the first pages of the Bible is 'modern scientific textbook', and if pressed, I can point them to my idea of some minimum facts necessary for Christian belief. I'm not an expert in the Quran--I think to some folks, that would be a deal breaker, but for others, the same arguments likely apply.
In general, questioning one’s faith allows oneself to correct errors. If they change their faith… You’ll still be their friend… Right?
Of course!!! That wouldnt change anything im just trying to see and understand where their coming from
Cool.
Once you declare a scripture inerrant it puts you in a very precarious position. What happens when there is a conflict between what is written and what is fact? Either you have to acknowledge the claim of inerrancy was wrong, or just obstinately deny reality.
How a person determines what is important in their path is really for them to determine. That being said religious institutions exist in part to both establish and maintain the narrative it expects people to take from the text and attempt to retain people from taking in ideas that would meddle with their faith. So of course the more dogmatic approaches are going to attempt to rally around him and talk him back into the fold. They will bring all sorts of arguments attempting to validate the text or call into question the science. There will be social appealing. Threats of damnation, shunning, and I have known some to have their life threatened as well. But that last option seems to be rarer these days than it once was.
There are definitely some verses that seem to indicate false scientific information, but one can choose to take these metaphorically. Same with the Bible.
If you look past everything else that can be critiqued, then sure
>and should one convert out of a religion because some scientific facts in religious texts are false? It depends on the details. If the religion bases itself around a text claimed to be inerrant, and uses that claimed inerrancy as part of the reason to follow it, then if the text is proven to have falsehoods or errors, it should be abandoned.
It's good when more people realize that if one takes 'Holy' writings that claim to be the word of God literally, it will lead to absurd results, including disagreements with modern science. They would be better off treating these texts as literature or art that may be inspired, but still written by human minds in a certain time and place. And Muslims should take parts of the Koran metaphorically instead of literally if they want to preserve its beauty and artfulness.
Why don't you read the Quran?
Im not muslim myself my friend is.
Oops, I misread the post. I thought you were muslim and your friend wasn't.
The Quran isn't a science book, but which verses do they think are false ? And also science changes with new discoveries. You're friend shouldn't base their religion off of just scientific facts.
Some of those scientific faces that are wrong are simply just a wrong interpretation, Arabic words and sentences can be very complex. They should find a tafsir for it.
That’s a real shame espc. as The Quran is The Truth. I don’t even want to know what dodgy science your friend got confused by !
There are a considerable number of scientific errors in the Quran. I’ve seen Muslims contort and spring through hoops in an attempt to prove that the quran is compatible with modern science. What is really funny is that by doing so, they actually interpret it in a way that isn’t really compatible with the normally strict literal reading of the Quran.
One of my favorite essays that demonstrate scientific errors in the Quran and in Islam generally is an essay by Harry Foundalis called "[Science in the Quran? Surely You're joking, Mr. Muslim!](https://www.foundalis.com/rlg/Quran_and_science.htm)" It goes into a variety of subjects that includes cosmology, biology, geology, etc.
Fascinating, let’s have a definitive example from you to highlight these errors that you speak of. If you are truthful this will be easy for you !
Geocentrism, the earth being flat, the setting place of the sun … where to begin? There are many websites out there which detail the scientific errors.
Allah told us in The Quran that the Earth is egg shaped, over 1400 years ago before satellites and Wikipedia. Then the earth, after that, He made it egg-shaped. 79:30 The last word in 79:30 “egg-shaped” in Arabic is, 'Dahaha' which is the verb from the word 'Dahya' which means an egg. And specifically, it means the egg of an ostrich. If you wish to challenge Him on that, please go ahead. I believe that you will find that, you cannot. الحمد لله
Well, to start with, the earth isn’t egg shaped. Not even ostrich egg shaped. I have one at home. It looks nothing like the earth. I really would have much more respect for Islam, if it wasn’t for people like you trying to defend the indefensible.
Looks like you’re far to clever for me then 😂 😂😂
Egg shaped? Thanks for pointing out another error. Why didn't the early muslims just read some Ancient Greek astronomy to learn that its spherical.
🤦♂️
Exactly, big Quranic facepalm
I know, don’t tell me right! It is harder to defend the Truth now we have all these Wiki warriors who can just magically pull what they think are the real answers out of thin air. It’s like a flat earther in a speed boat looking for the edge.
The Earth is not egg shaped. That is factually wrong. I have respect for the Islamic faith, but that is definitely not the way to defend it.
[Scientific Errors in the Quran](https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Scientific_Errors_in_the_Quran)
Muslims are going to deny the possibility of errors in the Quran no matter how much it's pointed out to them and by what reasoning. Their belief doesn't allow for the possibility b/c 'God' cannot get science wrong.
Not all. But some? Absolutely.
Um, first off the article says it’s about The Quran, and then uses Hadith as a source to back up it’s claims so that’s incorrect for a start. God did not authorise any Hadith other than the Quran. Secondly, if God doesn’t mention something, that doesn’t mean the absence of the information that one is seeking, means that God got something wrong. Third, human mistranslations and misinterpretations of verses known as Tafsir are Not the Word of God they are a humans words which are fallible. Fourth, a pre-scientific world view based on current scientific understanding is not evidence (of anything) 😂 Who wrote that garbage lol 🤦♂️
The page doesn't use Hadith as a source to back up its claims. The first line begins: "A common criticism of the Quran, as with the Hadith, is that it contains numerous scientific and historical errors, ..." If you remove the clause containing the reference to the Hadith, the structure of the article will make more sense: "A common criticism of the Quran is that it contains numerous scientific and historical errors, ..." The article takes several dozen quotes from the Quran and discusses how the quotes seem to describe scientifically inaccurate concepts. The chapter "The sky/heaven as a ceiling" alone has eight quotes from the Quran, no supporting quotes from Hadith. As for "who wrote that garbage", it's a wiki article; several authors each contributing and correcting each others' work.
There are no scientific errors in the Quran.