Top 5 Errors in Koran

[peterpin]

Ghaith explained it:
It says

"which comes out inbetween, including and not including, the thingyand the whatthemecallit"
but the words comes out and "inbetween" can all mean different things

so we get

"which shamwockies all over, in under, over and inbetween the thingy and the whathemecallit"

that will be more or less Ghaith's preferred translation.

There you go, all debunked!

Don'tyou understand?!! The quran is in clear arabic!

[Jonah]

Ghaith explained it:
It says

"which comes out inbetween, including and not including, the thingyand the whatthemecallit"
but the words comes out and "inbetween" can all mean different things

so we get

"which shamwockies all over, in under, over and inbetween the thingy and the whathemecallit"

that will be more or less Ghaith's preferred translation.

There you go, all debunked!

Don'tyou understand?!! The quran is in clear arabic!

WHos being a clown now peter?

[ringmaster]

.........................

there isnt 1 error in the Quran. So we will deal with your misunderstand one by one

Even bitchboy allah admits that he makes errors. That's why he has his verse on abrogation (2-106).

[kaimana1]

I was both banned and IP banned.

Uhhh no you were never banned much less ip banned, if that were true you wouldnt be posting now

Again sky this is your interpretation. The earth is in the universe its not the same object as it was seconds before the universe was created. So the Quran got it right.

Now this is between you and sky but i cant help but laugh at your copout response on this the quran got it right because the sky/heaven is not the same object- good god Ghaith!

[kaimana1]

Claiming to be a sunni or a shia is dividing Islam. Im not going to do that.

Well, claiming to have your own set of beliefs regarding fiqh etc...etc.. is also dividing islam yos- can't you see that?

Im not Shia dear Kai. The reason im open minded is because sunnis call Shias Kuffar. When there are 100-170 narrators of Sahih Bukhari are Shia.

The 100+ narrators you speak of being shia isnt exactly true:

some of them were accused of being shi'a because they were Mu'tazilis- those guys believed the first three caliphs were rightly guided like sunnis- so they werent exactly shi'a- No names come to mind but i will search for them if you like.

As for the others- you have to remember there was no hadees umm kafi during and before bukhari- there was no shia fiqh- they were simply muslims who believed ali was more important then other caliphs, there was no imami shia , no twelvers, seveners or fivers that is why that argument is shallow

I said im open minded about the authentic parts of their hadiths

.
Shias take their hadees with a grain of salt- like the ones about fatima being two years old when she married ali- now there isnt any hadee that says she was two years old in those words but the implications was their. So it's hard for them to try to justify it- so they pull their ijtihad card pretty frequently- we see sunnis doing that more often in recent years.

Well shia tend to do that to their hadees wholesale. have you been to shia chat?

Sunnis claim Sahih Bukhari is 100% Authentic.

Yeah the ones not on the internet, or the ones not involved in apologetics.

There are even theories that Imam Bukhari didnt write Sahih Bukhari

.
Well there's all sorts of theories regarding bukhari
i am aware of some of them like the one saying that bukhari and ibn muslim were closet zoroastrians trying to tamper mos reputation.

This is no joke- it's a group of pakistani muslims that also believe that pakistanis are descended from the ten lost tribes of israel and jesus went to pakistan after he was swooned off the cross and lived to 120 years old- (they believe jesus died) they are not qadianis though.

I will see if their site is still online. and post later.

Volume 7, Book 62, Number 169:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

(The Prophet) Solomon son of (the Prophet) David said, “Tonight I will go round (i.e. have sexual relations with) one hundred women (my wives) everyone of whom will deliver a male child who will fight in Allah’s Cause.” On that an Angel said to him, “Say: ‘If Allah will.’ ” But Solomon did not say it and forgot to say it. Then he had sexual relations with them but none of them delivered any child except one who delivered a half person. The Prophet said, “If Solomon had said: ‘If Allah will,’ Allah would have fulfilled his (above) desire and that saying would have made him more hopeful.”

Volume 8, Book 78, Number 634:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah’s Apostle said, “(The Prophet) Solomon once said, ‘Tonight I will sleep with ninety women, each of whom will bring forth a (would-be) cavalier who will fight in Allah’s Cause.” On this, his companion said to him, “Say: Allah willing!” But he did not say Allah willing. Solomon then slept with all the women, but none of them became pregnant but one woman who later delivered a half-man. By Him in Whose Hand Muhammad’s soul is, if he (Solomon) had said, ‘Allah willing’ (all his wives would have brought forth boys) and they would have fought in Allah’s Cause as cavaliers. “

Volume 8, Book 79, Number 711:


Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah’s Prophet Solomon who had sixty wives, once said, “Tonight I will have sexual relation (sleep) with all my wives so that each of them will become pregnant and bring forth (a boy who will grow into) a cavalier and will fight in Allah’s Cause.” So he slept with his wives and none of them (conceived and) delivered (a child) except one who brought a half (body) boy (deformed). Allah’s Prophet said, “If Solomon had said; ‘If Allah Will,’ then each of those women would have delivered a (would-be) cavalier to fight in Allah’s Cause.” (See Hadith No. 74 A, Vol. 4).

Well, at least two of those hadees have different chains of narration from abu huraira - in other words- this has been reported through several different people that heard it from abu huraira

They all remembered it differently through the different chains- that does present a problem

So i am a Muslim that belongs to no sect.

There's alot of christians that go to charismatic churches that say the same thing- because it sounds like the right thing to say but it's impossible, because you have to center your beliefs on interpretations of various passages in quran (in your case) on something- right? and your system of beliefs can not be guaranteed to be that of muhammad or his companions.

Because my point is the word doesnt exist outside Islamic sources

How do you know? virtually all of the pre-islamic arab sources were transmitted through muslims- you don't think they were biased? or at least felt sulbi if found in pre-islamic posetry etc. would be worth mentioning.

[Jonah]

Uhhh no you were never banned much less ip banned, if that were true you wouldnt be posting now

I was IP banned, i have no reason to lie about it, when i sent you that message i was using proxy. Recently i gained accses here again and made this account.
Dont ever doubt me again Kai

Now this is between you and sky but i cant help but laugh at your copout response on this the quran got it right because the sky/heaven is not the same object- good god Ghaith!

Im i wrong Kai? Is the galaxy and the earth 1 solid object?

As for the others- you have to remember there was no hadees umm kafi during and before bukhari- there was no shia fiqh- they were simply muslims who believed ali was more important then other caliphs, there was no imami shia , no twelvers, seveners or fivers that is why that argument is shallow

Sunnis also belive Ali is more important than other caliphs Kai He is blessed after all 33:33. Cant say the same for Umar and Uthman. So we are still having a problem to what was the difference between shias and sunnis back than besides the political issues.

shia chat?

I have an account there yes. But mods there doesnt seem to want to validate it for me. I just wanted to ask them why their books says that Muhammad real name was Qatem.

i am aware of some of them like the one saying that bukhari and ibn muslim were closet zoroastrians trying to tamper mos reputation.

I know Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj Nishapuri and Muhammad al-Bukhari where from persia. But than again we have Imam Bukharis miracle.

This is no joke- it's a group of pakistani muslims that also believe that pakistanis are descended from the ten lost tribes of israel and jesus went to pakistan after he was swooned off the cross and lived to 120 years old- (they believe jesus died) they are not qadianis though.

Now kai you should respect Islam,you know darn well Ahmadiyyas are not muslims. That like saying Mormons are Christians. And i belive they say jesus was 125 and its in India not Pakistan?

There's alot of christians that go to charismatic churches that say the same thing- because it sounds like the right thing to say but it's impossible, because you have to center your beliefs on interpretations of various passages in quran (in your case) on something- right? and your system of beliefs can not be guaranteed to be that of muhammad or his companions.

Yes but atleast this ways im good in the eyes of Sunnis and Shias . Personaly i think Shias are kind of silly with their whiping and grave worshiping and Imam Mehdi being 1200years old but they got a stable case on Ali.

How do you know? virtually all of the pre-islamic arab sources were transmitted through muslims- you don't think they were biased? or at least felt sulbi if found in pre-islamic posetry etc. would be worth mentioning.

People at that time tought that sperm came from the brain, why would they want to fabricate sulb than kai

[marduk]

Jonah, some Muslims probably hacked your account and messed with it. They do that sort of thing a lot. Was the password "default"?

[Fernando]

Jonah, some Muslims probably hacked your account and messed with it. They do that sort of thing a lot. Was the password "default"?

Why would they do that? Because he was being proven wrong?

[skynightblaze]

Again sky this is your interpretation. The earth is in the universe its not the same object as it was seconds before the universe was created. So the Quran got it right.

First of all quran does not talk about universe or planets at all when it says "heavens". By "Heavens" quran always meant the solid sky that can fall on your head so therefore no question of big bang being predicted by quran. I have already proven that.

Now even if we assume just for the sake of argument that quran is talking about universe it is still erroneous.

Quran tells us that earth and heavens were joined together before the separation but that is hardly scientific. It does not even come close what big bang suggest. A person who has not read big bang theory can only claim that one quran is talking about big bang.

The Big Bang actually consisted of an explosion of space within itself unlike an explosion of a bomb were fragments are thrown outward.

http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/bigbang.htm

Quran talks about separation of universe and earth i.e throwing of fragments outward however big bang talks about explosion within itself . So this is actually an error in the quran if you claim it is talking about big bang..

Secondly the big bang theory suggests that universe was formed around 14 billion years ago while the earth was formed just 4.5 billion years ago so for a period of 9.5 billion years (14 - 4.5) after the big bang actually happened there was no planet such as earth. Quran talks as if a fruit was cut into 2 and we had 2 pieces namely earth and universe. That is hardly scientific because there was nothing such as "earth" after the big bang. It only came around 9 billion years later.There is definitely a difference between what the quran is suggesting and what the big bang suggests.

I have also shown you that sky being separated from earth was a common belief at that time because those people believed that sky was a solid object which was separated from earth. That is what the verse is talking about.

Btw what is the point in doing 1 on 1? We would repeat the same arguments. You have left most of my arguments unanswered so if you want a one on one then we can do on some other topic.

Btw there are many problems that big bang theory cannot resolve so there is a very good chance that tomorrow the common known big bang theory might be discarded but you have already committed to big bang but I am sure muslims will change the meaning of the verses when they realize that big bang theory is not the right one.

[peterpin]

The Islamic/quranic cosmos is illustrated here rather well:

[Jonah]

Again sky with your own interpretations.


Didnt look much into your photo Peter, but where did they get hell is under earth

[Eagle]

To those FFI members who love repeating their already broken record regarding the alleged solid sky in the Quran. The Quran implies the non-solid nature of the various created samawaat/heavens. It firstly says that the primordial sama' was gaseous 41:11. It calls sama' the area where we are, above the ground composed of jaww/air where birds fly, clouds move 16:79,30:48 which is nothing else than the troposphere, and is by definition the lowest/first heaven. There are living creatures in the heavens/assamawaat 42:29,27:87,29:22 and when the disbelievers repeatedly challenged the prophet to bring down on them "pieces from the sky" 17:92,26:187 the Quran says that if that were done, they would think they are invaded by clouds 52:44 but the Quran specifies that when such phenomenon happens on the Resurrection, it will neither be solid pieces nor clouds but a smoke coming from assama' that will overtake them 44:10-11. If one wants the sama' to refer to the atmospheric layer in 17:92,26:187,52:44 it means the Quran is correctly implying it is composed of gases not one solid entity or solid objects falling from it.
It also says the sama' is expanding 51:47 and that the sun and moon (that are in the same sama' as other cosmic bodies like the stars 25:61) literally swim/yasbahun in assama' 21:33,36:40. And finally in 71:15 it says to ponder on how Allah created the heavens by looking throughout these layered entities meaning they cannot be solid entities one on top of the other with one layer covering the one above it.

Al these heavens/samawaat are upheld without any pillars as we can see 13:2. This verse, meant at striking the reader with the constant necessity for Allah's might and mercy by holding up the complex order of things above at all times without relying on any supports like pillars, would make absolutely no sense if it meant Allah actually relied on invisible pillars to do the job. He does so through His laws of nature which He maintains at each instant 32:5,65:12 making both heavens and earth to subsist by His command 30:25, these laws through which He prevents them both from ceasing to function and which uphold them both 22:65,35:41"upholds the heavens and the earth lest they come to naught". Allah therefore upholds/yumsik both heavens and earth, not only the heavens or what is above the earth, which carries more the sense of "sustaining" than holding up. But if one still wants the literal meaning to be applied then it also shows that the Quran does not depict the earth as "the bottom" of the universe for just as the heavens are upheld, the earth too is upheld by Allah.
He is the only One preserving the order of the things above us without having recourse to massive structures like pillars, as well as bellow us, despite man's ungratefulness and if He would stop upholding them both, nothing -no pillars- would maintain them in order "and if they should come to naught, there is none who can uphold them after Him; surely He is the Forbearing, the Forgiving". So not only is the body of things bellow us and above in the sky ever maintained without disruptions and neither do the heavenly components collapse on earth so as to cause massive destructions 22:65"except with His permission", but the sky is also a source of protection to man like a structure just as the earth is a comfortable "couch" or a "craddle" allowing the developpement of life 2:22,20:53,40:64.

[yeezevee]

To those FFI members


Quran implies... gas..41:11. It calls...gases...........

OK. Eagle.,. Quran is all gas and full of gases..

Does that mean it is miraculous text?? does that make it as word of Allah god

[Centaur]

I remember this froogle having a long debate on this sama with MBL, have anybody got a link on it? may be skb help me.Mean time let the sun set in the murky water(zulkarnyan reached the place where sun sets)
where does son go at night
Sahih” Bukhari Volume No. 4 Hadith Number 421
Narrated Abu Dhar:
The Prophet asked me at sunset, “Do you know where the sun goes (at the time of sunset)?” I replied, “Allah and His Apostle know better.” He said, “It goes (i.e. travels) till it prostrates Itself underneath the Throne and takes the permission to rise again, and it is permitted and then (a time will come when) it will be about to prostrate itself but its prostration will not be accepted, and it will ask permission to go on its course but it will not be permitted, but it will be ordered to return whence it has come and so it will rise in the west. And that is the interpretation of the Statement of Allah: “And the sun Runs its fixed course For a term (decreed). that is The Decree of (Allah) The Exalted in Might, The All-Knowing.”

[skynightblaze]

I remember this froogle having a long debate on this sama with MBL, have anybody got a link on it? may be skb help me

I will try to find the link for you . Eagle is a dishonest person and he changed the meaning of Sama every now and then when he debated MBL. I will reply to his nonsense post and just see how he dances around the issue.

[skynightblaze]

To those FFI members who love repeating their already broken record regarding the alleged solid sky in the Quran. The Quran implies the non-solid nature of the various created samawaat/heavens. It firstly says that the primordial sama' was gaseous 41:11. It calls sama' the area where we are, above the ground composed of jaww/air where birds fly, clouds move 16:79,30:48 which is nothing else than the troposphere, and is by definition the lowest/first heaven.

If Sama means troposphere then eagle falsifies the quran many counts.. See

55:33
O ye assembly of Jinns and men! If it be ye can pass beyond the zones of the heavens and the earth, pass ye! not without authority shall ye be able to pass!

If Sama means troposphere where birds fly , clouds move then 55:33 is definitely false because quran claims that none would be able to pass through the ZONES of heavens however as we humans as well as birds have passed through the troposphere.

67:5
And we have, (from of old), adorned the lowest heaven with Lamps, and We have made such (Lamps) (as) missiles to drive away the Evil Ones, and have prepared for them the Penalty of the Blazing Fire.

Troposphere is only 7-20 kms above the surface of the earth so if 67:5 is true then we must be finding the lamps that Allah used to adorn the first heaven. So eagle where are these lamps that are within the first 20 kms of the earth’s surface as Allah tells us?

SO you see how your fraudulent and crap answers do not hold water?

If everything above us is Sama ,then you cannot account for space that is "Between heavens and earth" that the quran is referring to in the verse 15:85 quoted below. However we can account for empty space "between heavens and earth" if we consider that heavens is a roof and earth is the base. In short quran refutes you or if you continue to be stubborn then you falsify the quran... See the verse for yourself..

15:85.
We created not the heavens, the earth, and all between them, but for just ends. And the Hour is surely coming (when this will be manifest). So overlook (any human faults) with gracious forgiveness.

Let us see another verse..

21:30.
Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?

So if we take you claim that Sama means everything above earth and not solid sky as I claimed then was everything above earth (birds, clouds, other planets , layers of atmosphere) joined with earth before Allah supposedly separated them?? None of the above items mentioned in the brackets were joined with earth.

I guess I have provided sufficient evidence to destroy your false claims but wait I still have more evidence which will be put in the next post.

[skynightblaze]

^^^^^^CONTINUED FROM ABOVE

There are living creatures in the heavens/assamawaat 42:29,27:87,29:22 and when the disbelievers repeatedly challenged the prophet to bring down on them "pieces from the sky" 17:92,26:187 the Quran says that if that were done, they would think they are invaded by clouds 52:44 but the Quran specifies that when such phenomenon happens on the Resurrection, it will neither be solid pieces nor clouds but a smoke coming from assama' that will overtake them 44:10-11.

The first few lines of your post are somewhat irrelevant and I will start from the portion where you say that verses of Jday reflect that quran did not consider sky to be solid.

Just because quran said that smoke will be emitted , it does not mean that the heavens quran referred to must be in gaseous form. You conveniently skipped the following verses that describe the Jday and indicate quran thought that the sky was a solid object.

77:9.
When the heaven is cleft asunder;

How can a gaseous object be cleft asunder?

78:19.
And the heavens shall be opened as if there were doors,

Again if quran thought that heavens was not a solid object then how is using the analogy of opening doors appropriate? How can something that is gaseous in state be opened like doors??

Let us see one more verse relating to Jday …

21:104.
The Day that We roll up the heavens like a scroll rolled up for books (completed),- even as We produced the first creation, so shall We produce a new one: a promise We have undertaken: truly shall We fulfil it.


How can the heavens be rolled up like a scroll for books unless the author of quran thought it was a solid object that could be rolled up???? Now the con man eagle would try to say that it is talking about Allah’s might and power or control but it isn’t because the analogy of rolling up a scroll of books would be incorrect in that case.

If one wants the sama' to refer to the atmospheric layer in 17:92,26:187,52:44 it means the Quran is correctly implying it is composed of gases not one solid entity or solid objects falling from it.

What do you mean “If one wants….”????? We are interested in the truth and not what one wants. Anyway you have been educated above on this.

It also says the sama' is expanding 51:47 and that the sun and moon (that are in the same sama' as other cosmic bodies like the stars 25:61) literally swim/yasbahun in assama' 21:33,36:40.

So how does this mean that quran is talking about gaseous things ? Even solid objects expand so these verses hardly prove anything.

And finally in 71:15 it says to ponder on how Allah created the heavens by looking throughout these layered entities meaning they cannot be solid entities one on top of the other with one layer covering the one above it.

This infact shows how intellectually bankrupt the author of quran was!. If quran was talking about layers of atmosphere as you said then it is foolish to address such verses to people during muhammad's time who did not have any knowledge about atmospheric layers .How are they supposed to understand what quran is talking about? Also in case of solid sky , the disbelievers would still not be able to see the 7 heavens. So either way this proves that author of quran lacked common sense.

Spoiler! :

Al these heavens/samawaat are upheld without any pillars as we can see 13:2. This verse, meant at striking the reader with the constant necessity for Allah's might and mercy by holding up the complex order of things above at all times without relying on any supports like pillars, would make absolutely no sense if it meant Allah actually relied on invisible pillars to do the job. He does so through His laws of nature which He maintains at each instant 32:5,65:12 making both heavens and earth to subsist by His command 30:25, these laws through which He prevents them both from ceasing to function and which uphold them both 22:65,35:41"upholds the heavens and the earth lest they come to naught". Allah therefore upholds/yumsik both heavens and earth, not only the heavens or what is above the earth, which carries more the sense of "sustaining" than holding up. But if one still wants the literal meaning to be applied then it also shows that the Quran does not depict the earth as "the bottom" of the universe for just as the heavens are upheld, the earth too is upheld by Allah.

I have already proven above that quran does not make sense if it is talking about what you are saying here. Btw this is not a story telling competition. Ibn Kathir quotes the views of companions of Muhammad and obviously they knew better than you and also logically your answers do not add up..WE all know what a phony you are! Read the tafsir of Ibn Kathir in the spoiler below..

Spoiler! :

..without any pillars that you can see.) meaning, `there are pillars, but you cannot see them,' according to Ibn `Abbas, Mujahid, Al-Hasan, Qatadah, and several other scholars. Iyas bin Mu`awiyah said, "The heaven is like a dome over the earth,'' meaning, without pillars. Similar was reported from Qatadah, and this meaning is better for this part of the Ayah, especially since Allah said in another Ayah,

﴿(He withholds the heaven from falling on the earth except by His permission. )﴿22:65﴾ Therefore, Allah's statement,

﴿ت
(..that you can see), affirms that there are no pillars. Rather, the heaven is elevated (above the earth) without pillars, as you see. This meaning best affirms Allah's ability and power.

http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option ... &Itemid=68

Except Qatadah and Mu`awiyah all the companions of Muhammad reported that this verse was talking about invisible pillars that were raised to elevate the heaven. Mu`awiyah however clarifies that the sky was elevated like a dome while Qatadah merely talks about elevation of heaven but none of the companions of Muhammad talk about sustenance as you claim. In short all of them companions of Muhammad claimed that this verse was talking about solid sky which was elevated above earth..

He is the only One preserving the order of the things above us without having recourse to massive structures like pillars, as well as bellow us, despite man's ungratefulness and if He would stop upholding them both, nothing -no pillars- would maintain them in order "and if they should come to naught, there is none who can uphold them after Him; surely He is the Forbearing, the Forgiving".So not only is the body of things bellow us and above in the sky ever maintained without disruptions and neither do the heavenly components collapse on earth so as to cause massive destructions 22:65"except with His permission", but the sky is also a source of protection to man like a structure just as the earth is a comfortable "couch" or a "craddle" allowing the developpement of life 2:22,20:53,40:64.

The only point I find here addressing is about heavenly components collapsing on earth while rest is all meaningless gibberish coming from brainwashed person.

Quran is talking about solid sky collapsing in 22:65 however you are somehow trying to portray that it is talking about heavenly bodies/meteors. You said that Allah does not allow heavenly bodies to collapse onto earth however you added a clause “Except with his leave”. Now either Allah allows heavenly bodies to crash onto earth or he does not. You cant have the cake and eat it too.

If Allah allows the heavenly bodies to fall on some occasions then it means that he does not protect earth. We have evidences of meteors striking the earth in the past so this means Allah does not protect the earth from meteors but 22; 65 claims that Allah does! So if we take the meaning of pieces of sky falling as meteors or heavenly bodies then it falsifies the quran! SO the meaning cannot be meteors or a heavenly body unless you are ready to claim that quran is in error here.

This again reiterates my point that quran is talking about solid sky because solid sky has never fallen down so far and Muhammad thought it would never fall. Quran even talks about shooting stars chasing the jinn so clearly quran was not referring to them in 22:65 otherwise please please accept the contradiction ..

Here is the link to the craters formed due to meteor strikes..

http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/fe ... earth/1403

[Eagle]

If Sama means troposphere

Sama' means "what is above". It can be everything or a particular entity or entities above the ground. The context decides, as in any language.

If Sama means troposphere where birds fly , clouds move then 55:33 is definitely false because quran claims that none would be able to pass through the ZONES of heavens however as we humans as well as birds have passed through the troposphere.

It adresses men and jinn, not birds or clouds, and it doesnt say none can pass through it, just that whoever among the men and jinn desire to do it then they will only do it if God allows it. We are in the troposphere with God's authority and can only pass it with His authority

Troposphere is only 7-20 kms above the surface of the earth so if 67:5 is true then we must be finding the lamps that Allah used to adorn the first heaven.

The Arabic doesnt say "lowest". It says sama' addunya or literally the heaven of the world, which is above our world ie our planet (including its atmosphere).

If everything above us is Sama

Not necessarly "everything". See beginning of post

then you cannot account for space that is "Between heavens and earth"

That statement does not negate there being a heaven "between heavens and earth", and the Quran clearly calls the area of the birds and clouds a sama'/heaven.

However we can account for empty space "between heavens and earth" if we consider that heavens is a roof and earth is the base

The earth is not the "base" because it needs to be upheld, just like the heavens as already explained in the previous post

was everything above earth (birds, clouds, other planets , layers of atmosphere) joined with earth before Allah supposedly separated them?

21:30 doesnt say "joined together". Go there viewtopic.php?f=21&t=12725&start=300#p183434 when one of your people was properly educated on this verse

I guess I have provided sufficient evidence to destroy your false claims

Of course you did

The first few lines of your post are somewhat irrelevant

It says there are living creatures "in" the heavens. Not above, on, or below the heavens, but "in" them. How can creatures live within a solid entity

How can a gaseous object be cleft asunder?

Scroll up for the definition of sama'

Again if quran thought that heavens was not a solid object then how is using the analogy of opening doors appropriate?

As you surprisingly understood, it is making an analogy or more precisely it is using imagery to convey the notion that this often repeated protective structure above will not shelter life on earth anymore and will let pass every calamity from above

How can the heavens be rolled up like a scroll for books unless the author of quran thought it was a solid object that could be rolled up?

A solid structure like a dome can be folded up? 21:104 along with other many similar verses such as 39:67 is one of many verses playing off the imagery of the tent and it is a particularly beautiful analogy with the tent being folded up by the voyager when he leaves his destination just as the Almighty will fold up the universe to take man on a new journey to eternity 21:104. The imagery of creation in the Quran is compared to a beduoin tent (sama' as canopy, earth as carpet, mountains as pegs) because tents are folded up by beduoin dwellers as they move on to their next life and destination. Like a tent, the earth and heavens too will be folded up to usher in a new existence. There is nothing that depicts temporality better than the tent-life of a beduoin.

What do you mean “If one wants….”?

It means accepting your untenable position just for argument's sake

So how does this mean that quran is talking about gaseous things ?

It certainly isnt talking about anything solid "in" which cosmic bodies are literally swimming.

Even solid objects expand

You mean objects like rubber. So the Quran says there are several rubber domes expanding one above the other Besides, your position is that the sky will crack and fall in pieces to the ground. People shouldnt worry much about pieces of rubber falling on their head then

If quran was talking about layers of atmosphere..people during muhammad's time who did not have any knowledge about atmospheric layers

It includes layers of atmosphere in its description of the heavens but it isnt only speaking of it. It also includes what is above our planet and its atmosphere, which it refers to as sama' addunya/heaven of the world in which cosmic bodies swim, ie outter space.

How are they supposed to understand what quran is talking about?

By looking up the verses that describe the various heavens and what they contain as well as reading verses such as 71:15 speaking of how the heavens are in tabaq/levels/layers with each layer having its function 78:12 and being firm and well secured.

Also in case of solid sky , the disbelievers would still not be able to see the 7 heavens

In case of solid domes topping eachother, how would one see the layers behind the first one? The Quran says to look at the 7 heavens meaning one should be able to see through them. This doesnt mean it thought their sight could reach the ends of the universe just as someone telling you to look at outter doesnt mean you are expected to see the furthest galaxy

Except Qatadah and Mu`awiyah all the companions of Muhammad reported that this verse was talking about invisible pillars that were raised to elevate the heaven.

Its not the heaven but the heavens (plural). So how can these entities in which cosmic bodies swim, birds fly etc can be raised by pillars? And as already said:

Allah therefore upholds/yumsik both heavens and earth, not only the heavens or what is above the earth, which carries more the sense of "sustaining" than holding up. But if one still wants the literal meaning to be applied then it also shows that the Quran does not depict the earth as "the bottom" of the universe for just as the heavens are upheld, the earth too is upheld by Allah.

Quran is talking about solid sky collapsing in 22:65

It says sama' not sky. Go back up for the definition of the word

however you added a clause “Except with his leave”

The Quran, not me

Now either Allah allows heavenly bodies to crash onto earth or he does not.

When did an object last crash on earth so as to destroy humanity. The verses are obviously speaking of protection from complete destruction. It's common sense, of which the FFI ghost town dwellers lack severly in their struggle against faith. Do you think when it says we are provided with the sun to allow life, then it didnt know people could die in the desert from sun exposure or that the life giving rains couldnt also cause death? These various imageries point out the general benefits man gets from these phenomenons, without giving an absolute description of their functions.

Quran even talks about shooting stars

Meteors, not stars go there viewtopic.php?f=21&t=12725&start=300#p183434

chasing the jinn so clearly quran was not referring to them in 22:65

There is no connection between God providing protection for mankind from the calamtities of above and jinn being attacked by meteors

[Centaur]

SKB please start a separate thread otherwise this guy will ruin this thread with his ever changing polemic or ignore him

[skynightblaze]

SKB please start a separate thread otherwise this guy will ruin this thread with his ever changing polemic or ignore him

I do not think starting a new thread is worth because I will at the max make 2 posts after which I will ignore him . This charlatan would continue changing his arguments and will argue till the end. My counter reply will almost answer cover everything that he has raised here so let me know what you want me to do .