₦airaland Forum

experts:
i keep saying enjoy your responses.

You're welcome. Is that why I don't see you being able to respond to my rejoinders and instead running to your muslim sites to plagiarise posts from there to Nairaland?

u claim u did not plagiarized. yet you keep copying information from this source http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Science/seven_earths.html, islam-watch.com and many more.

Hahaha!!  I saw that site - and in post #64 I already noted that your plagiarised arguments have been addressed by Sam Shamoun; yet I did not copy-and-paste anything from the link you posted above. If I did, please point it out directly, thanks.

The fact is that my rejoinders about your seven earths and what you find at that link are DIFFERENT. While you may find quotes from the following Muslim sources -

[list][li]Al-Tirmidhi[/li]
       [li]Fiqh-us-Sunna[/li]
       [li]Tafsir Ibn Abbas[/li]
       [li]Al-Tabari[/li]
       [li]Muhammad ibn 'Abd Allah al-Kisa'i[/li]
       [li]Shaykh Al-Albani[/li]
       . . . etc.,[/list]

-  you will not find me having lifted any answers or quotes from those sources - for one main reason: I like to do a thorough check on factual info for myself before I post them, instead of lifting another man's arguments and pretend they are my own scholarship. And since I do not have the original sources of the above, I did not lift or copy-to-paste anything from that page in my rejoinders to your plagiarised arguments in this thread.

This is why I still leave the challenge open to you: "show me where I plagiarised anybody's article", period. Quote them, show what I copied word-for-word as you did in your plagiarism, and let's discuss your allegations. Otherwise, I'll just take you for the simpleton you want to show of yourself.

about the numbers of the layers of the earth, al you claim to be the layers of the earth are not.

Sorry dude, I did not claim anything about the Quran arguing something of the 'layers of the earth'. Go back and read your Quran - there is no translation I have come across with any good reason to twist Sura 65:12 to mean "layers of the earth". Why? Because the Quran did not mention anything about the layers of the earth - but instead said that Allah created SEVEN EARTHS. Your hadiths and other Islamic sources have argued the same thing and not any layers anywhere. Instead of alleging what you can't prove in my posts, I would advise that you go back to read where you lifted fallacies from your scholars who have been busy trying to force the Quran to say what it never did.

there are only seven accepted layers of earth everywhere in the world.

There are MORE THAN SEVEN layers of the earth's structure everywhere in the world where reasonable people do their research properly. I have shown you source after source after source - and all you come here to do is deny them with just one sentence like that solves all your problems? Please don't make me laugh some more at you.

and you can check the planet earth site http://library.thinkquest.org/28327/html/universe/solar_system/planets/earth/interior/layers_of_earth.html

Thank you for that recommendation. Now let's compare what that site says about the layers of the earth's internal structure and what you previously posted, shall we?

This are the layers you previously posted in post #75 ~
          _______________________________________

          THE LAYERS OF THE EARTH
             . . .

           These, as scientists have identified, are:

           1st layer: Lithosphere (water)

           2nd layer: Lithosphere (land)

           3rd layer: Asthenosphere

           4th layer: Upper Mantle

           5th layer: Inner Mantle

           6th layer: Outer Core

           7th layer: Inner Core
           _______________________________________

          https://www.hebrew4christians.com/Glossary/article_divider.gif

. . . and these are the strata that appear at 'thinkQuest' link you provided:
         _______________________________________

         'Tomographists have found that this planet is divided into six regions:
[list][li]the inner core,[/li]
[li]the outer core,[/li]
[li]the lower mantle,[/li]
[li]the upper mantle,[/li]
[li]the transition region,[/li]
[li]and the crust (oceanic and continental).[/li][/list]
           _______________________________________

Do you notice that 'thinkQuest' states that earth is "divided into six regions"??

Indeed, when it listed them out, it divides the crust into two parts to make the list seven strata -

[list]Here is a brief synopsis of the depths of each layer (in kilometers):
[li]1. 0- 40 Crust[/li]
[li]2. 40- 400 Upper mantle[/li]
[li]3. 400- 650 Transition region[/li]
[li]4. 650-2700 Lower mantle[/li]
[li]5. 2700-2890 D'' layer[/li]
[li]6. 2890-5150 Outer core[/li]
[li]7. 5150-6378 Inner core[/li][/list]

Then when you look carefully at the discussion of each stratum, there are actually EIGHT of them discussed on that page, instead of six or seven -

[list][li]1. The inner core[/li]
[li]2. The outer core[/li]
[li]3. the lower mantle[/li]
[li]4. the upper mantle[/li]
[li]5. the D" layer of Earth[/li]
[li]6. the Transition region[/b][/li]
[li]7. the Oceanic crust[/li]
[li]8. the Continental crust[/li][/list]

You will find EIGHT distinct strata discussed on that page, as outlined above.

What is remarkable is that that page does NOT list the asthenosphere which you earlier listed in post #75; but it lists the "D' Layer" which you did NOT list earlier. Does this show an agreement between your various listing?

However, let's cut it down to basics for you. There are many sources giving various lists of the strata of the earth's internal structure - and these are commonly accepted geoscientific delineations:

[list][li]Continental crust (or, continental lithosphere)[/li]
[li]Oceanic crust (or, oceanic lithosphere)[/li]
[li]Mohorovičić discontinuity[/li]
[li]Asthenosphere[/li]
[li]Upper mantle[/li]
[li]Lower mantle[/li]
[li]Mesoshpere (middle mantle)[/li]
[li]'D' Layer[/li]
[li]Outer core[/li]
[li]Inner core[/li]
[li]Gutenberg Discontinuity[/li]

(please see post #78 for the sources already cited)[/list]

You may also find the image below quite useful if you're confused:

     https://www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com/files/OGL98016.jpg

experts:
and after getting the fact about the seven layers of earth.

you challenged me to provide a verse from the Qur'an that talked about the seven earth to be layers and here is it.

the Qur'an said


Do you not see how He created seven heavens in layers? (Qur'an, 71:15)

He Who created the seven heavens in layers… (Qur'an, 67:3)

  Dude, what is wrong with you? I asked for any verse where the Quran spoke about SEVEN EARTHS to be "layers", and all you have come back to post is SEVEN HEAVENS to be layers?!? Is everything okay at your end?

Please, just go and sit down somewhere and count your beads. So far you're not a serious fellow and are just scuttling in circles with your desperations. The Quran did not mention any "layer" about the SEVEN EARTHS. Period.

Your hadiths did not talk about any "layer of the earth". Muhammad did not divide the earth into layers in the Quran - so why are you trying to force the Quran to say what it does not say at all?

bilms:
hey.

Experts you have done a lot here.

I agree - mr. experts has done a lot of dubious posting here. Enjoy.

this man is just going from siet to site to paste but yet you stick to show him the truth

Please show me where I went from site to site to copy-and-post anything in my responses. Just blowing hot air is not cutting it for you.

balium:
1.
John chapter 14 verse 16:
"And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever."

2.
Gospel of John chapter 15 verse 26:

"But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which
proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me."

3.
Gospel of John chapter 16 verse 7:

"Nevertheless I tell you the truth; it is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not
come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you".

Only quoting these verses alone should show any unbiased reader that Muhammad is NOT spoken of in any of those verses. There are a few things to consider for those who argue Muhammad into John's Gospel -

1. Muhammad is nowhere ever called "the Spirit" - not in the Bible, not in the Quran, not in the Hadiths, and definitely NOT in any Islamic prophecy given by Muhammad himself. If you find any verse at all where Allah ever referred to Muhammad as "the Spirit", you can kindly post such a verse for us to read for ourselves. Where you cannot post such a verse from your Quran or Hadiths, it means you're only arguing your Muslim fallacy into other people's religion and making a mockery of your own Quran.

2. In Islam, God is NOT known as Father. Therefore, when John 15:26 says that the Spirit comes from the Father and is sent by Jesus Christ, we know already that such a verse was not about Muhammad. You would have to look for a new way of twisting the Quran to pretend that Allah is ever referred to by Muslims as 'Father', or admit that Muhammad's Islam has nothing to do with John's Gospel.

3. John 16:7 says: ".[color=Black].[/color]. but if I depart, I will send him unto you" - that was Jesus speaking, and affirming that He would send the Comforter. If Muslims want to argue Muhammad into that verse, then they are saying that it was Jesus who sent Muhammad - which we know is factually denied in Islam! Muhammad has nothing in all the Quran nor the hadiths to show that he was sent by Jesus - so why do Muslims try ever so hard to dribble Muhammad into John's Gospel?

balium:
"Ahmed" or "Muhammad" meaning "the one who praises" or "the praised one" is almost the translation of the Greek word Periclytos.

For starters, there is no Greek word 'periclytos'. No native Greek speaker will tell you there is a Greek word known as 'periclytos' - instead, it is only Muslim propagandists that twist all sorts of words to mean something in Islam that it does not mean outside Islam.

Second, the Greek word 'paraklētos' (παράκλητος) does not come close to meaning "the one who praises" or "the praised one". Rather, it means 'one who pleads another’s cause', such as an advocate.

In order to achieve any semblance of 'periclytos' for the meaning of 'Ahmed', Muslims have to corrupt a language they do not understand so as to find gaps to squeeze Muhammad into the fit.

In the Gospel of John 14:16, 15:26, and 16:7. The word 'Comforter' is used in the English translation for the Greek word Paracletos which means advocate or a kind friend rather than a comforter.

Okay, thanks for admitting that Paracletos means 'advocate or a kind friend' - does that sound anything like the meaning you have given for Ahmed?

Paracletos is the warped reading for Periclytos.

Please show us how that is so, instead of repeating the age-old Muslim lie. How is 'paracletos' the warped reading of 'periclytos'?

Jesus (pbuh) actually prophesised Ahmed by name.

Please show us - because this vacant "say-so" is not going to work any magic for your propaganda.

Even the Greek word Paraclete refers to the Prophet (pbuh) who is a mercy for all creatures.

The word Paraclete does not refer to Muhammad. Where did Allah ever speak Greek and said in your Quran that Muhammad was to be called 'paraclete'?

Some Christians say that the Comforter mentioned in these prophecies refers to the Holy Sprit. They fail to realise that the prophecy clearly says that only if Jesus (pbuh) departs will the Comforter come.

The promise of the Holy Spirit was given by the OT prophets as well to indicate an outpouring of God's Spirit on all who should believe on Jesus Christ (see Joel 2 for example). In John's Gospel, Jesus was referring to the same thing that the OT prophets had made known about the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

The Bible states that the Holy Spirit was already present on earth before and during the time of Jesus (pbuh), in the womb of Elizabeth, and again when Jesus (pbuh) was being baptised, etc. Hence this prophecy refers to none other than Prophet
Muhammad (pbuh).

The Holy Spirit had been present on earth but had not been poured out upon all believers in Christ UNTIL Jesus would be glorified (John 7:39 - "But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified".

4.
Gospel of John chapter 16 verse 12-14:

"I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you unto all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me".this is point clear that the comforter was not refering to the holy spirit but to another prophet yet to come and as i far i can recollect no other prophet came jesus except muhammad.

John 16:12-14 was not speaking about another prophet. I hope you did not miss the fact that the Comforter is called "the Spirit of Truth", and that this "Spirit of Truth" is called "the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost" in John 14:26.

~ Where in the Quran is Muhammad called "the Spirit of Truth"?

~ Where in the hadiths did Allah refer to Muhammad as "the Spirit"?

~ Where in the Quran or hadiths did Allah refer to Muhammad as "the Holy Ghost"?

When you Muslims have nothing to show for Muhammad anywhere, you abandon your Quran and keep running to the Bible for support about your arab prophet.

Deep Sight:
Yawn.

We have just proven that people taking the bible seriously proves and shows nothing.

99% of humanity are a herd of cows in spiritual matters.

You've proven absolutely nothing other than your OOI duplicity. Only those with the zig-zag mentality mendacity like you diplay will make 99% of humanity herds of cows simply because the remaining 1% do not give two scoobies about your OOI. You're alone in your swallowed infinity - so carry on.

Deep Sight:
You would be surprised the number of brilliant people and brilliant scientists who as Hindus, take belief in the divinity of cows seriously.

Brilliant people do not go about aimlessly like sons of an infinity OOI that nobody makes any sense of. And the brilliance about it is that we are able to let Hindus have their own say in what they believe instead of the drama you put up on Nairaland. FYI, that verse in the Hindu scriptures does not teach that all Hindus regard their God/god to be a cow or other bovine - so you can rest your heart and stop hiding your rogue religion on that excuse of yours.

You would also be surprised that brilliant people have lived in all cultures throughout the ages and have accepted all sorts of pagan doctrines as inviolable truth.

Yep, and we don't have any problems with people in general. Your problem is that your blind OOi does not help you live civilly with people without seeking to post your idiocy against arguments you never take time to understand in the first place.

Brilliance, Viaro?

Try me - your life will never be the same again!

Deep Sight:
Well if your Bible teaches you such things as material bodies rising to reside bodily and materially in immaterial and intangible realms (a proposition no serious thinker would countenance), then you will have to understand why I am not able to take your book of myths any more seriously than an edition of Sesame Street.

You would be surprised the number of people who take the Bible seriously - people who can think far better than the mental zig-zag of your OOI that nobody ever makes sense of, and which you on this forum has laboured to convert only yourself. Pity.

I do understand, though - and I sympathise that you still go about like a vexed soul unable to understand his own plight. I tried, bro . . . believe me, I tried to make you see some sense, initially. But I guess I was so fresh as to be largely unware that your lost trail began before time. Keep swimming in your infinity of ignorance - it keeps souls like yours so deeply bemused.

^^ Funny.

Deep Sight:
Well first off I am not derailing the thread. Just putting an interesting spin on the discussion.

The thread is about the authenticity of the bible.

It is thus altogether apposite to examine biblical claims with a view towards adducing what authenticity a rational mind may attribute to that book.

In this the interpretations given by adherents of the bible are of course invaluable.

I have news for you. Have you ever read 'somewhere' that someone who tries to wade into a discussion before he first determines the matter is quite foolish? That's precisely what you're demonstrating here on your errand trip - and that 'somewhere' happens to be Proverbs 18:13.

You should not be carried away by the title of the thread. Read first the arguments in the OP - and that was what I addressed: nothing more or less. It was not about examining Biblical doctrines, but one that was rather a question of whether -[list]

of all the religions mentioned above, does any one of them possess their scriptures in its entirety BOTH in writing AND in memory from the day of its revelation until our time

[/list]

The OP proceeds to claim that infact a yes could be adduced to that basic question for the Quran, whereas it could not be so said about the Bible. My answer was this:[list]

Almost certainly not. We know that transcribing any document may involve certain problems with preservation, which again may affect other areas such as original manuscripts, translation difficulties and authenticity of content and style.

[/list]

Therefore, were it a question of Biblical doctrines, my answer would be different - as was the case in other threads where Muslims have tried to argue that Muhammad was the Prophet to come in Deuteronomy 18, which is not true.

Consequently, this thread was neither a question of "examin(ing) biblical claims" nor of "interpretations given by adherents of the bible". The discussions so far has not been about claims anywhere in any verse of the Bible that 'Allah created SEVEN EARTHS' or any claims about "seven heavens turning out to be layers of the atmosphere". You ought to have carefully followed the gist of this thread before throwing your misadventures into the so-called 'mix' and ending up showing how redundant you can be.

Deep Sight:
So Elijah is a great case exactly because the discussion had veered towards a muslim claim regarding a visit into various "heavens."

The discussion did not veer into various heavens to bring in Elijah. I don't see anywhere in our posts (between the OP's and my rejoinders) where Elijah is mentioned in any sphere of the atmosphere - the sphere of the atmosphere being what the OP copied-and-pasted from some of his muslim apologists. I wanted to know where the Quran claims anything about the "seven heavens" becoming the spheres of the atmospheres, if anything at all - and that is what the whole talk about the "seven heavens" was about, rather than about Elijah.

Deep Sight:
If we are to be objective and fair, it only makes sense to challenge similar claims within the Bible.

You're being deceitful, not fair. WHERE is there any such "similar claims" in the Bible that answers to what the Quran claims in Sura 65:12?!? Are you so far gone that you just drag yourself along heavily with your penchant to be so currish?

FYI, this is what the Quran says in Sura 65:12 -

[list]Hilali-Khan:
"It is Allah Who has created seven heavens and of the earth the like thereof (i.e. seven). ,  "

Khalifa:
"GOD created seven universes and the same number of earths. ,  "[/list]

If your misadventures of "similar claims" for the case of the Bible has any substance to it, please tell me: WHERE does the Bible make such a "similar claim" that God created SEVEN EARTHS?!?

If you don't know the meaning of words (which you certainly demonstrate you don't), then it is little wonder that you assume a similarity of claims where there is none on this issue of the SEVEN EARTHS that we have been discussing so far. Please show me where the Bible ever makes a "similar claim"  as the Quran did in chapter 65:12, instead of spewing out your duplicity.

Deep Sight:
Thus with this -

- I am satisfied that you sir, have confirmed in open court what i indicated were your claims to wit -

Please shut up and get lost! I am not in any courts - open or closed, and if you're only trying to advertise your failure to hold your day-job of lavatory-retriver, say so and stop boring us all with your nonsense.

Deep Sight:
Now as the discussion is now about “heavens,” let us juxtapose the muslim claims above against your interesting claims regarding Elijah zapping off to heaven with his physical body.

There's no basis for juxtaposing anything about what I understand of Elijah's case with a claim about SEVEN EARTHS. Try that for size and let's see.

Deep Sight:
Now before proceeding might I remind you that your own holy book (the bible) specifically states that physical bodies do not reside in spiritual realms. Nevertheless perhaps we can leave the Bible for a moment and reflect on exactly what spirituality entails.

I don't know where the Bible makes any claims that physical bodies do not reside in spiritual realms. Rather, I know that the Bible declares that the bodies of the saints shall be "changed" whereby "this corruptible shall have put on incorruption" (1 Cor. 15:51-54). Beyond that, the Bible shows indeed that physical bodies have been taken into the heavenly realms - as in the case with Elijah and Enoch. You have a penchant for misrepresenting what you read - the usual skit for dubious fellows.

Deep Sight:
God is an intangible transcendental being. It is well understood that God is not physical.

Oh, here we go again. Is your OOI any intangible transcendental being, DeepSight? You don't even know what your own god is, before trying to argue away at what others believe. Son, you're truly lost. But carry on. . .

Deep Sight:
We also understand that the spiritual is not the physical.

Spiritual things are not tangible in the fashion that physical things are.

I think that it is apt to re examine your understanding of that which is spiritual, if you will suggest that physical bodies ascend bodily and dwell physically in spiritual realms.

Please cut to the chase and stop wasting our time. Your churning is not getting you any nearer to your aim.

The very existence of death – a separation of the body from the spirit, if you will reflect, is enough to evince this.

Just shut up already! How many times have we been through this issue in the past and you have forever failed to show any verse for the DEATH of Elijah? The Bible leaves you a clear example in another personage where death was not involved - ENOCH. On these two cases, what have you shown to the point that they both died, DeepSight? You sound more like the dee[color=Black]pshi[/color]t you have always been known for.

Just produce ONE VERSE where it is said that Elijah died in the manner of the separation of spirit from body. Just one verse will do. If you have no such verse(s) to show that same, please shut up and end this dubious game of yours . . . of keep your duplicity forever on the loose.

Deep Sight:
The spirit leaves the body because material things are adjusted to material realms while immaterial things are adjusted to immaterial realms. This is the very reason that the spirit of man requires a physical body to dwell on earth, which is a material realm. Only when that body is set aside can the intangible spirit return to its intangible realm.

Dude, with all of that, please show me one verse where it is said that either Elijah or Enoch died. That is as simply as I can put my request over to you.

Deep Sight:
The very words “immaterial” and “intangible” as attributes of the spiritual make it resoundingly clear that it is inconceivable for a material thing to “enter” into something or someplace that is altogether intangible!

It is very conceivable for the material to enter into the spiritual or 'intangible'. Such was the case with Enoch, such is the case of the ascension of Christ, and such is the case of His appearing among His disciples while the doors were shut (John 20:19).

Deep Sight:
Supposing that a physical body such as ours may dwell in a realm which is altogether intangible is absolutely illogical in the extreme – given the very fact of the intangibility of that realm.

It is not illogical - your own argument is both extreme and illogical. When Jesus rose from the dead, His disciples were able to touch and handle Him (John 20:27). With that same glorified body, He ascended into heaven (Acts 1:9).

Not only so, but the seemingly reverse is noted as well - the spiritual meets the physical and a tangibility is established. Such was the case of the angel of the Lord who encountered Gideon (Judges 6:19-21). I know these things are far beyond you - not to worry, OOI has nothing for you that is why you go about like a lost prodigal abandoned by your rogue religion.

Deep Sight:
Again the very make of the physical body is designed to deal with a physical atmosphere – in all its functions. Do you really suppose such a body with such functionalities can enter into a realm said to be intangible?

Absolutely.

Deep Sight:
In that case I would really be puzzled as to your understanding of the word “intangible.”

Please share with me what you understand by it if it is different from what we all know that word to mean. Please do.

Deep Sight:
I want you to understand that mankind’s spiritual journey is a journey of increasing intangibility and thus a journey of increasing purity towards God. The physical body is thus but a coat which is used for the physical realm – and as we move on after death we proceed ever more intangible.

I don't have any problem with what esoteric doctrines you make for yourself. All I do care about is that you don't confuse your esoterism with other people's religions so you can misrepresent them in your career of misplaced arguments. That's all.

Deep Sight:
I verily fear that your bold affirmation that your prophet bagged his physical body into an immaterial realm and remained there with it before returning in same body centuries later to this earth is so bizarre, mythical and off-centre that if interpreted that way, all rational persons must perforce conclude that the Bible contains really simplistic myths and legends. Or that you are simply ready to believe very strange myths indeed. At the expense of that which is simple, rational and balanced.

I have no worries about that - and yes, I do believe it affirmatively. You may castigate what I believe; but I would rather believe that than commit to an OOI that has suffered the eternal plague of a damned infinity you have never been able to set on level ground for anyone to make sense of. How many people on Nairaland have made sense of your OOI?

Deep Sight:
And that is the issue of this thread. . . the authenticity of the bible.

That is the title of the thread, not the gist of the thread. Go read the OP and massage your skull. . . your de[color=Black]epsh[/color]it already stinks.

Deep Sight:
As a post-script I should mention that I did point out that your interpretation of the Elijah story amounts to exempting him from death even before the sacrifice of Christ – which was supposedly required to save mankind from death. This shows up serious internal inconsistencies, I’m afraid, and again begs the Ops question as to the authenticity (or I would say, believability) of your scriptures.

There are no inconsistencies. All we have asked forever is show us one verse where it is said that Elijah died - that was all. Why have you never been able to show that verse instead of all this drab that trails your redundant attention-seeking adventure?

I love this thread. Thanks to everyone who shared knowledge freely here - some of the things you guys posted are what others would make mega-bucks with.

InesQor:
And thus Deep Sight is poised to derail the thread into another possible multi-page scuffle.

Did you expect anything better from his derailing trips?

Deep Sight:
^^^ Oh please. Are we forgetting so soon your interesting suppositions that Elijah -

I don't have the short memory you often display, sorry. There was nothing you were able to show that came close to intelligence in that discourse; and I could bet you're not intelligent enough to see that this thread is not about Elijah. If you miss viaro, say so and I can oblige you another exile.

1. Never died

Did I argue to the contrary?

2. Vanished into thin air

Your call - the Muslim in this thread did not show us where Muhammad might've seen Elijah among the seven layers of his Muslim atmosphere. Wanna help him?

3. Entered heaven with his physical body.

I have absolutely no problem with that.

4. Appeared beside Jesus at the transfiguration again with said same physical body after residing with it in heaven for some relaxing centuries.

Yes. And your point is. . .?

Grand assertions, sir.

Yours, I guess. I was hoping where you would have helped the Muslim apologist here vote for any number of his seven earths that the Bible does not argue.

What fanciful stories do you have for us today, Viaro?

Relax . . . I'm still hearing news from the grapevine that you are running errand on your pyjamas. Please leave that Gulder bottle alone so you can think really deep.

Deep Sight:
Perhaps you should be more concerned with the whereabouts of Elijah no?

Why should I be more concerned about the whereabouts of Elijah? Did the Bible claim Allah created the seven earths of Muhammad's theology?

experts:
I keep wondering if you think you are the only one that know it all, but sorry this is not a matter of just ordinary knowledge, but the knowledge of truth.

I did not claim to know it all; but I'm fascinated by the gull of Muslim apologists who are deceiving themselves on their own ready-made fallacies in order to force the Quran to say what it does not say.

experts:
You keep saying i plagiarized, but this is the revelation of the truth.

I still challenge you to deny the fact that you plagiarised, copied-and-pasted, and "lifted" other people's articles of fallacies pretending to be 'the truth'. Sad thing is that all the plagiarised materials you posted in this thread have been debunked.

experts:
Most of what you keep pasting here are also on many other site,  like answering islam,islam- watch and many others, yet you claim i plagiarized.

Please show me where I plagiarised even one argument to post in response to yours. JUST ONE will do. I have shown where you can read responses to your own copy-and-paste (such as "Sam Shamoun's article" in post #64); but even at that, I have not plagiarised anybody's work and dressed them to look like my own, unlike what you have done repeatedly in this thread!

experts:
But for your information, i have learn from most of these writers and i have access to there works. i read and understand them, i pass the message to the world. i have written some of mine as topic of assignment, they read and commend me aswell.

FYI, most of what you plagiarise and dubbed from are conclusive fallacies - that is what I have addressed and the record is still up there for your consideration. The reason why you never address them is because you can't find any ready-made article to plagiarise as responses to my rejoinders, so no biggies there.

experts:
I keep laughing at you when you accused me of plagiarizing yet ,that's what you are doing.

I'm still asking you to show me where I plagiarised anybody's article. At the very least, where I have caught you doing that very thing, I have lift you links to verify them. You, on the other hand, can only accuse me of what you cannot prove - quite a pity.

For now, we know that your Quran is not scientific nor miraculous. The arguments of your apologists on the seven heavens and seven earths are fallacies which have been forced to make the Quran say what it does not say at all. The Quran does not say that allah created seven layers of the earth - it said that Allah created SEVEN EARTHS (Q. 65:12) and we don't need rocket science to know that there is only ONE EARTH.

Bottomline: please show me where the other SIX EARTHS of Allah are located. You only show that the Quran got it wrong, and is neither scientific nor miraculous, if you keep making excuses and are unable to show the OTHER SIX EARTHS of Allah (not six layers which the Quran never claims), not to mention that Muhammad's 'seven heavens' are a fallacy in his night dream.

As regards the above ^^^ let me reiterate:

viaro: 2.   they tell us that Gabriel descended from the "seventh heaven" to the "seventh earth" - but what does this mean?

The bigger question, however, is this: What did Muhammad mean by the seven earths?

We do not read anywhere in the Quran about 'seven layers of the earth' - NOT IN ANY VERSE. And there is no support in the Quran for the idea of lithosphere, mantle, asthenosphere, or core in any verse - no matter what your mullahs may say. Instead, what we read is just "seven earths" and no explanation given about any layer of the earth.

Therefore, the only way one could get any understanding of what Muhammad meant by the 'seven earths' is to seek connections about that clause both in the Quran and other authentic sources of Islamic history and theology.


1. The Seven Heavens - Hadiths

There are several hadith verses that speak about seven heavens and their descriptions according to Muhammad. The reader should please bear in mind that these have absolutely nothing to do with any sphere of the atmosphere in the geosciences. Muslims who are claiming that the 'seven heavens' in the Quran are pointing to the seven layers of the earth's atmosphere will find quite a task indeed to explain away the fallacy of that notion in the face of what Muhammad described in these hadiths:

[list]

Sahih Bukhari: Narrated Malik bin Sasaa: The Prophet said, "While I was at the House in a state midway between sleep and wakefulness, (an angel recognized me) as the man lying between two men. A golden tray full of wisdom and belief was brought to me and my body was cut open from the throat to the lower part of the abdomen and then my abdomen was washed with Zam-zam water and (my heart was) filled with wisdom and belief. Al-Buraq, a white animal, smaller than a mule and bigger than a donkey was brought to me and I set out with Gabriel. When I reached the nearest heaven. Gabriel said to the heaven gate-keeper, 'Open the gate.' The gatekeeper asked, 'Who is it?' He said, 'Gabriel.' The gate-keeper,' Who is accompanying you?' Gabriel said, 'Muhammad.' The gate-keeper said, 'Has he been called?' Gabriel said, 'Yes.' Then it was said, 'He is welcomed. What a wonderful visit his is!' Then I met Adam and greeted him and he said, 'You are welcomed O son and a Prophet.'

Sahih Bukhari: Then we ascended to the second heaven. It was asked, 'Who is it?' Gabriel said, 'Gabriel.' It was said, 'Who is with you?' He said, 'Muhammad' It was asked, 'Has he been sent for?' He said, 'Yes.' It was said, 'He is welcomed. What a wonderful visit his is!" Then I met Jesus and Yahya (John) who said, 'You are welcomed, O brother and a Prophet.'

Sahih Bukhari: Then we ascended to the third heaven. It was asked, 'Who is it?' Gabriel said, 'Gabriel.' It was asked, 'Who is with you? Gabriel said, 'Muhammad.' It was asked, 'Has he been sent for?' 'Yes,' said Gabriel. 'He is welcomed. What a wonderful visit his is!' (The Prophet added. There I met Joseph and greeted him, and he replied, 'You are welcomed, O brother and a Prophet!'

Sahih Bukhari: Then we ascended to the 4th heaven and again the same questions and answers were exchanged as in the previous heavens. There I met Idris and greeted him. He said, 'You are welcomed O brother and Prophet.'[/color]

Sahih Bukhari: Then we ascended to the 5th heaven and again the same questions and answers were exchanged as in previous heavens. there I met and greeted Aaron who said, 'You are welcomed O brother and a Prophet".

Sahih Bukhari: Then we ascended to the 6th heaven and again the same questions and answers were exchanged as in the previous heavens. There I met and greeted Moses who said, 'You are welcomed O brother and. a Prophet.' When I proceeded on, he started weeping and on being asked why he was weeping, he said, 'O Lord! Followers of this youth who was sent after me will enter Paradise in greater number than my followers.'

Sahih Bukhari: Then we ascended to the seventh heaven and again the same questions and answers were exchanged as in the previous heavens. There I met and greeted Abraham who said, 'You are welcomed o son and a Prophet.' Then I was shown Al-Bait-al-Ma'mur (i.e. Allah's House). I asked Gabriel about it and he said, This is Al Bait-ul-Ma'mur where 70,000 angels perform prayers daily and when they leave they never return to it (but always a fresh batch comes into it daily).'

sources:
Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4, Book 54, Number 429
Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 5, Book 58, Number 227
Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 9, Book 93, Number 608

see also:
Sahih Muslim, Book 1, Number 0309
Sahih Muslim, Book 1, Number 0314
[/list]

Anyone who reads the source will see immediately that I only quoted the relevant parts of the sahih hadiths instead of quoting the very lengthy verses. What is obvious, however, is that Muhammad's descriptions of the seven heavens have nothing to do with the geosciences nor the seven layers of the earth's atmosphere. Yet, it is interesting  to see what he said about these various heavens -

[list][li]he 'met' Adam in the 'nearest heaven' (ie., the 'first heaven')[/li]
[li]he 'met' Jesus and Yahya (John) in the 'second heaven'[/li]
[li]he 'met' Joseph in the 'third heaven'[/li]
[li]he 'met' Idris in the fourth heaven[/li]
[li]he 'met' Aaron in the fifth heaven[/li]
[li]he 'met' Moses in the sixth heaven[/li]
[li]he 'met' Abraham in the seveth heaven[/li][/list]

There are huge questions to ask you, mr experts: if the seven heavens are the seven layers of the earth's atmosphere, then -

1.   is Adam in the 'nearest heaven' (ie., Troposphere)?
2.  are Jesus and Yahya (John) in the 'second heaven' (ie., Stratosphere)?
3.  is Joseph in the 'third heaven' (ie., Mesosphere)?
4.  is Idris (Enoch) in the '4th heaven' (ie., Thermosphere)?
5.  is Aaron in the 'fifth heaven' (ie., Exosphere)?
6.  is Moses in the 'sixth heaven' (ie., Ionosphere)?
7.  is Abraham in the 'seventh heaven' (ie., Magnetosphere)?

. . . most important, in which of the 'seven layers' of the atmosphere
      is Muhammad himself to be found today?!?

You see, mr experts, the effort of Muslim scholars to force the Quran to say what it does not say only makes them quite untenable and a huge fallacy! The Quran does not speak about any layers of the atmosphere; and there are far more than 12 layers of the earth's atmosphere - more than that, Muhammad did not speak about any of those layers of the atmosphere; which from the hadiths only result in further confusion of the 'seven heavens' of Islamic eschatology. The one thing that is definite here is this: the muslim apologists who are talking about the atmosphre of the earth are only confusing themselves in that fallacy.

experts:
The truth of this similarity between the sky and the layers of the Earth, only identified by 20th century technology, is without doubt another of the Qur'an's scientific miracles.

20th century technology demonstrates that there are both more than seven layers of the earth's structure and atmosphere in either case. The lists I gave earlier showed that the earth has more than 10 layers in its internal structure as well more than 10 spheres in its atmosphere. Therefore, what we see is that the Quran is NOT scientific nor miraculous.

experts:
You can go find out more about this verse anywhere and come back with more of your argument.

I don't need to go very far to find out anything other than what I have already shown you. Unless you want us to post what your own muslim scholars have said about such verses in the Quran - which I could most gladly do.

Recalling Quran 65:12 in two of your preferred English translations (Khalifa and Hilali-Khan):

Khalifa:
GOD created seven universes and the same number of earths. . .

Hilali-Khan:
It is Allah Who has created seven heavens and of the earth the like thereof (i.e. seven).

. . . it is either it is "universes" that are meant (according to Khalifa) - which is NOT the same thing as the layers of the atmosphere; or it is "seven earths" (according to Hilali-khan) - which is NOT the same as layers of the earth's structure.

This is what I found in one of such interpretations of the verse [Quran 65:12] -

[list]

{ ٱللَّهُ ٱلَّذِي خَلَقَ سَبْعَ سَمَٰوَٰتٍ وَمِنَ ٱلأَرْضِ مِثْلَهُنَّ يَتَنَزَّلُ ٱلأَمْرُ بَيْنَهُنَّ لِّتَعْلَمُوۤاْ أَنَّ ٱللَّهَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ وَأَنَّ ٱللَّهَ قَدْ أَحَاطَ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عِلْماً }

God it is Who created seven heavens, and of earth the like thereof, that is to say, seven earths. The command, the revelation, descends between them, between the heavens and the earth: Gabriel descends with it from the seventh heaven to the seventh earth, that you may know (li-ta‘lamū is semantically connected to an omitted clause, that is to say, ‘He apprises you of this creation and this sending down [that you may know]’), that God has power over all things and that God encompasses all things in knowledge.

source: Tafsir al-Jalalayn -
http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=65&tAyahNo=12&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2

[/list]

In such a 'tafsir' (interpretation of the Quran), two things are highlighted from your muslim scholars:

1.   they argue that Allah created "seven earths" - they did not interprete that as 'seven layers of the earth'. If that is so, then nobody needs to argue long and hard about 'layers' of the earth, because that is not what the Quran claimed in Q. 65:12.

2.   they tell us that Gabriel descended from the "seventh heaven" to the "seventh earth" - but what does this mean? If we are to go by the interpretations of your mullahs, then we would be reading that Gabriel descended from 'the magnetosphere' (your 'seventh heaven') down to the 'inner core' (your 'seventh layer' of the earth). You already see that such a proposition is not supported even remotely by your Quran or the hadiths. Your Quran is not scientific nor miraculous, and your muslim scholars have got it all confused and wrong.

experts:
The verses below inform us about the appearance of the seven layers of the atmosphere: i.e

    Do you not see how He created seven heavens in layers? (Qur'an, 71:15)

We've been through this fallacy of yours already. The Quran did not claim that the 'seven heavens' are the layers of the atmosphere; and we have seen that there are FAR MORE THAN SEVEN LAYERS of the earth's atmosphere! Why are you making your Quran to say what it does not say?

Let me remind you again of some of the spheres of the earth's atmosphere:

[list][li]chemosphere[/li]
[li]exosphere[/li]
[li]heterosphere[/li]
[li]homosphere[/li]
[li]ionosphere[/li]
[li]magnetosphere[/li]
[li]mesosphere[/li]
[li]neutrosphere[/li]
[li]ozonosphere[/li]
[li]peplosphere[/li]
[li]pasmasphere[/li]
[li]stratosphere[/li]
[li]substratosphere[/li]
[li]thermosphere[/li]
[li]troposphere[/li][/list]

These are some of the scientific divisions of the earth's atmosphere, and your muslim scholars don't seem to have grasped it yet. Instead, they are busy ignoring these facts and posting only seven so they can force the Quran to say what it does not say at all.

Second, the divisions which your muslim scholars make are not consistent. Go through the various lists they give about the layers of the atmosphere or the layers of the earth - they are not the same and are not consistent, not to mention that they are wrong.

For example, look at the list below:

experts:
1st layer: Lithosphere (water)
2nd layer: Lithosphere (land)
3rd layer: Asthenosphere
4th layer: Upper Mantle
5th layer: Inner Mantle
6th layer: Outer Core
7th layer: Inner Core

There are other layers of the earth's structure that are missing. However, for simplicity, let's not confuse the layer called 'water' - it is usually called 'hydrosphere'.

However, if we have to look at a more detailed list of the earth's structure, then from the following sources:
[list][li]SolarViews[/li][/list]
[list][li]MoorlandSchool[/li][/list]
[list][li]Merriam Webster[/li][/list]

we gather the structure of the earth as including:

[list][li]Continental crust (or, continental lithosphere)[/li]
[li]Oceanic crust (or, oceanic lithosphere)[/li]
[li]Mohorovičić discontinuity[/li]
[li]Asthenosphere[/li]
[li]Upper mantle[/li]
[li]Lower mantle[/li]
[li]Mesoshpere (middle mantle)[/li]
[li]'D' Layer[/li]
[li]Outer core[/li]
[li]Inner core[/li]
[li]Gutenberg Discontinuity[/li][/list]

That's definitely more than 10 layers; and no source would argue that there are only 7 layers. Here are some images to help you understand why they are MORE THAN 7 LAYERS:

[list]https://visual.merriam-webster.com/images/earth/geology/structure-earth.jpg
~  from Merriam Webster[/list]

[list]https://www.solarviews.com/thumb/earth/earthfg2.gif
~ showing D' layer, from Solarviews[/list]

From all the above, it should be clear to you that your muslim scholars got it all mixed up and factually wrong! You need to go back and get a good grasp of what your Quran is saying. If we were to take your muslim scholars' interpretations so far, then the Quran would be seriously contradicting the facts on ground and therefore utterly bursting your arguments.

@experts,

It's quite amusing that you keep copying-and-pasting other people's arguments. The latest above ^^ in post #75 is another one that appears in muslim websites - for example: HarunYahya and AssataShakur. Nonetheless, they are still patently wrong on many counts, some of which I have discussed already in post #67.

It would've been far better for you to reason from your own understanding instead of your plagiarising exercises. How long are you going to keep running to other people's arguments that have been debunked already?

experts:
yes Allah created seven heavens and of the earth the like there of. we all accepted it is seven,

So where are Allah's seven earths? We know of only one earth - so please show us where the other six earths are located. The Quran does not claim that there are "seven layers" of the earth, so the argument to now make that verse (Quran 65:12) into seven layers is patently wrong! Also, the layers of the earth that you listed are WRONG! If you're wrong about the Quran and wrong about the list of earth's structure, what is left of your cut-and-paste?!?

Besides, do you know of any source where either Allah or Muhammad told you that the "seven earths" are seven layers of the earth? Where?!? It is not in your Quran (I've finished reading the English translation) - and I can't find it in the hadiths (which I'm still reading). Please if you know of any place where Allah or Muhammad claimed that the SEVEN EARTHS are 'layers of the earth' like lithosphere, mantle, asthenosphere, etc - POST THE VERSES AND LET'S READ THEM FOR OURSELVES, thanks.

@balium,

balium:
THE QUR'AN (KORAN) FORETOLD IN THE BIBLE?

No - absolutely NOT.

balium:
Was it a coincidence that the prophet "like unto Moses" from the "brethren" of the Israelites (i.e. from the lshmaelites) was also described as one in whose mouth God will put his words and that he will speak in the name of God, (Deuteronomy 18:18-20).

There are no similarities between Moses and Muhammad in that index, so there could be no real or imagined 'coincidental, occidental or oriental' drama for Islam in Deuteronomy 18:18-20.

When God said He would raise up a Prophet like unto Moses, we have to ask: in what manner did God speak to Moses? And the answer is found in Exodus 33:11 - 'And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend.' We also know that God spoke with the Israelites face to face (Deut. 5:4).

Please tell me: WHERE did Allah ever speak to Muhammad "face to face"?

Second, when we read that "he will speak in the name of God", we have to ask: what was the name that God revealed of Himself to Moses and to Israel? The answer is also before us in Exodus 6:3 - 'And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.'

Please tell me: WHERE did Muhammad ever speak to anybody in the name of JEHOVAH?

Dude, forget this game - Muhammad is NOT the Prophet of Deuteronomy 18; and all the propagandists looking for the prophet of Islam in the Bible are deceiving themselves.

balium:
Was it also a coincidence the "Paraclete" that Jesus foretold to come after Him was described as one who "shall not speak of himself, but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak (John 16:13)

The "Paraclete" is NOT Muhammad; and to have inferred John 16:13 for Muhammad is blasphemy!

This is what John 16:13 says - 'Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come'.

It is in John 16:7 that we read of the 'Paracletos' ('for if I go not away, the Comforter [paracletos] will not come unto you') - and earlier in John 14:26 we understand what Jesus meant by the 'Comforter' -

But the Comforter [paracletos], which is the Holy Ghost,
whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you
all things, and bring all things to your remembrance,
whatsoever I have said unto you.

It is in John 15:26 that the Comforter [paracletos] is precisely called 'the Spirit of Truth' as in John 16:13 -

But when the Comforter [paracletos] is come, whom I will send unto you
from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father,
he shall testify of me [John 15:26]

There are a few questions to ask and a few observations to make here:

1.   John 16:14 testifies that the 'Spirit of Truth' will glorify Jesus Christ:
question: was Muhammad glorifying Jesus Christ or just interested in glorifying the arabian deity commonly called 'Allah'? If Muhammad did not come to glorify Jesus Christ, Muslims have no business trying to dribble Muhammad into John 16:13.

2.   John 15:26 tells us that Jesus is the One who sends the Comforter [paracletos - the 'Spirit of Truth'] from the Father.
question: Did Muhammad anywhere say that he was sent by Jesus Christ? Did Muhammad say anywhere that he was sent from the Father? Does Islam preach GOD as the FATHER? If Muhammad does not claim that he was sent by Jesus Christ, and if he denies the FATHER, then he is NOT the Comforter - and Muslims have no business trying to dribble Muhammad into John 15:26.

3.  John 14:26 defines the Comforter [paracletos] to be the same as the Holy Ghost.
question: where did Muhammad ever call himself either 'the Comforter [paracletos]', or 'the Holy Ghost', or even 'the Spirit of Truth'? Where did Allah ever refer to Muhammad by any of these names according to John 15:26?!? If Muhammad is NEVER referred to by such a title/name, then again Muslims have no business trying to dribble Muhammad into John 14:26.

It is funny how desperate your Muslim apologists and propagandists can be! Indeed, I know that all the arguments you posted here are NOT YOUR OWN but a plagiarised work from one Dr. Jamal Badawi posted in IslamCity.

In any case, perhaps that is why chakula refers to your cut-and-paste as:

chakula:
Good for lying your post based on reserch, keep it up.

Yes, 'Dr.' Jamal Badawi ought to add another feather to his lying cap.

@balium,

balium:
Habakkuk 3:3 speaks of God (God's help) coming from Te'man (an Oasis North of Medina according to J. Hasting's Dictionary of the Bible), and the holy one (coming) from Paran. That holy one who under persecution migrated from Paran (Mecca) to be received enthusiastically in Medina was none but prophet Muhammad.

This is what Habakkuk 3:3 says: "God came from Teman, and the Holy One from mount Paran. Selah. His glory covered the heavens, and the earth was full of his praise." If you read on to verses 4 and 5 -

'And his brightness was as the light; he had horns coming out of his hand:
and there was the hiding of his power. Before him went the pestilence,
and burning coals went forth at his feet.'

Does this passage speak about Muhammad? Absolutely NOT. How does the Quran demonstrate that Muhammad had "burning coals" going forth from his feet? Where in the hadiths do we find such descriptions of Muhammad?

Meanwhile, when the Jewish prophets speak about "the Holy One", everyone knows that is an appellation of God, and not of Muhammad. The same prophet Habbakuk identifies the Holy as God Himself - 'Art thou not from everlasting, O LORD my God, mine Holy One?' (Hab. 1:12).

The prophet Isaiah also identifies God as the Holy One - 'I am the LORD, your Holy One, the creator of Israel, your King' (Isaiah 43:15).

Why do you Muslims like snatching verses from other religions to blindly argue an Islamic credulity for Muhammad?

balium:
Indeed the incident of the migration of the prophet and his persecuted followers is vividly described in Isaiah 21:13-17. That section foretold as well about the battle of Badr in which the few ill-armed faithful miraculously defeated the "mighty" men of Ke'dar, who sought to destroy Islam and intimidate their own folks who turned -to Islam.

Isaiah 21:13-17 has nothing to do with anyone turning to Islam. It does not describe any battle of Badr; and if you insist, then remember indeed that Badr in Islamic history is one case where Allah revealed a quranic verse that was cancelled and is NOT found in the Quran today. I have shown this in another thread - go see for yourself.

Besides, may I remind you of what the prophet Isaiah said in that passage in your quote -

"For thus hath the Lord said unto me, Within a year, according to
the years of an hireling, and ALL THE GLORY of Kedar shall FAIL:
And the residue of the number of archers, the mighty men of
the children of Kedar, shall be diminished:
for the LORD God of Israel hath spoken it."
[Isaiah 21:16-17]

Isaiah said that ALL THE GLORY of Ke'dar shall FAIL. There are no half measures describing some half-Arabians tunring to Islam or otherwise - the whole passage has absolutely nothing to do with Islam. Period.

Nezan:
Must islam gain acceptability through the Bible?

Hehe, I wonder how else they would gain the credibility they seek.

@balium,

balium:
THE AWAITED PROPHET WAS TO COME FROM ARABIA

Farce. Fallacy. False.
There is no verse speaking about the Prophet coming from Arabia - in so far as the Jews were not Arabians, nor do the verses apeak about the "cousins" turning into Jewish prophets.

balium:
Deuteronomy 33:1-2 combines references to Moses, Jesus and Muhammad. It speaks of God (i.e. God's revelation) coming from Sinai, rising from Seir (probably the village of Sa'ir near Jerusalem) and shining forth from Paran.

There are no such "combinations", sorry. As you have acknowledged yourself, the passage speaks of God Himself and not about "God's revelation". It says, 'The LORD came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands of saints: from his right hand went a fiery law for them.'

The same thing is highlighted in Hab. 3:3 - 'God came from Teman, and the Holy One from mount Paran. Selah. His glory covered the heavens, and the earth was full of his praise.'

balium:
Isaiah 42:1-13 speaks of the beloved of God. His elect and messenger who will bring down a law to be awaited in the isles and who "shall not fail nor be discouraged till he have set judgement on earth."

Isaiah 42 was not speaking about Muhammad. Verse 1 says, "I have put my Spirit upon him" - and this shows us that it was NOT Muhammad that was meant there. Why? Because there is no verse in the Quran or hadith that teaches that God put His Spirit upon Muhammad - if there is any such verse(s), please post it/them and let us read for ourselves.

Verse 6 also says: "I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles" - is there any verse that says that Muhammad was given as a covenant to anybody? I have not read any such verses in the Quran or hadiths - so if you have any verse on that, please post it and let's read for ourselves.

balium:
Verse 11, connects that awaited one with the descendants of Ke'dar. Who is Ke'dar? According to Genesis 25:13, Ke'dar was the second son of Ishmael, the ancestor of prophet Muhammad.

Isaiah 42 verse 11 is talking about God who is to be praised, not about any arabian prophet. If you read it together with verse 12, the sense is clear:

Let the wilderness and the cities thereof lift up their voice,
the villages that Kedar doth inhabit: let the inhabitants of
the rock sing, let them shout from the top of the mountains.
Let them give glory unto the LORD, and declare his praise
in the islands.

That passage does not speak about any arabian prophet to rise among the Jews, nor does it give any idea of an arabian prophet to be praised. It is God who is to be praised there. The same prophet Isaiah says this of Ke'dar -

"For thus hath the Lord said unto me, Within a year, according to
the years of an hireling, and all the glory of Kedar shall fail:
And the residue of the number of archers, the mighty men of
the children of Kedar, shall be diminished:
for the LORD God of Israel hath spoken it."
[Isaiah 21:16-17]

It is not only Isaiah that prophesied such spoiling and diminishing of Ke'dar - another prophet (Jeremiah) also spoke about the same unfortunate despoiling of Ke'dar:

Concerning Kedar, and concerning the kingdoms of Hazor,
which Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon shall smite,
thus saith the LORD; Arise ye, go up to Kedar, and spoil the men of the east.
Their tents and their flocks shall they take away: they shall take to themselves
their curtains, and all their vessels, and their camels; and they shall cry
unto them, Fear is on every side. [Jeremiah 49:28-29]

I wonder why no Muslim apologists ever reads those verses when they often try to play their games of dribbling Muhammad into Isaiah's prophecies. Meanwhile, we don't read about either prophet Isaiah or Jeremiah in the Quran - why?

@balium

balium:
MUHAMMAD:
The Prophet Like Unto Moses

Long time after Abraham, God's promise to send the long-awaited Messenger was repeated this time in Moses' words.

God did not make any "promise" to Abraham to send any 'Prophet' from Arabia; so where do you get the idea of "repeated" from?!? The first time he made any promise to send a Prophet was in Deuteronomy 18:15, then reiterated in verse 18 - both instances were spoken by Moses.

balium:
In Deuteronomy 18:18, Moses spoke of the prophet to be sent by God who is:

1) From among the Israelite's "brethren", a reference to their Ishmaelite cousins as Ishmael was the other son of Abraham who was explicitly promised to become a "great nation".

First, Moses did NOT say that the promised 'Prophet' was to come from anybody's "COUSIN", hehe!   You guys should learn to read simple statements without sweating to force the verse to shout for Muhammad!

Second, the promise to become a "great nation" does not include the promise of any prophet rising from the Ishmaelites - no verse in the Pentateuch (first five books of the Old Testament [Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy]) makes any such twisted arabian promises, sorry.

Third, once again I am posting you the same reply I have argued about the fallacy of Muslim apologetics to force Muhammad into Deuteronomy 18 - see below:

---

The foundation of Deuteronomy 18:18 is the Mosaic covenant given to Isreal as found reiterated in Deuteronomy chapter 5 - "The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb", and goes on to show that this covenant was not made with any other nation apart from the Jews. For Deut. 18:18 to have any import, it would have to be based on the covenant which forms its foundation - and that is where we shall try to understand what is meant in that context by 'brethren'.

First, Jews do not receive their prophecies from Arabs - which is why that verse in 18:18 clearly points out.

Second, 'brethren' as used there is one of covenant relationship among all those who are home-born as Jews and can show their pedigree from the families of Israel. Others who lived among them but could not point to any Jewish family ties were called 'sojourners' or 'strangers', not brethren. It is for this reason that two distinct groups were recognized in Israel based upon that covenant: "Whosoever he be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn in Israel" (Lev. 20:2).

Third, it is important for anyone at that time to identify their pedigree - otherwise it would be practically impossible for such a person to know where they stood in relation to the covenant life of Israel. Some of these covenant living include:

[list][li]the feast of the Jews[/li]
[li]political and civil life[/li]
[li]covenant relationships in prophecy[/li][/list]

Where is Muhammad in all that?

But more to the point is that there was only ONE LAW applicable to all who dwelt within Israel (Lev. 24:22); yet, sojourners (that is non-Jewish people dwelling in Israel) could not partake of the feasts of the Jews in exactly the same ceremonial standing as a native Jew. Why? Because when the covenant was made and ratified, it was representing only Jews - "The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day" (Deut. 5:3). So what then does this entail? Look below:

A. Jewish Feasts - Conditions for the Sojourner:

[list]Exodus 12:43-45, 48 ~~ "And the LORD said unto Moses and Aaron, This is the ordinance of the passover: There shall no stranger eat thereof: But every man's servant that is bought for money, when thou hast circumcised him, then shall he eat thereof. A foreigner and an hired servant shall not eat thereof." . . . "And when a stranger shall sojourn with thee, and will keep the passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one that is born in the land: for no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof."[/list]
[list]Exodus 29:33 - "And they shall eat those things wherewith the atonement was made, to consecrate and to sanctify them: but a stranger shall not eat thereof, because they are holy."[/list]
[list]Lev. 22:10 - "There shall no stranger eat of the holy thing: a sojourner of the priest, or an hired servant, shall not eat of the holy thing."[/list]


B. Jewish Political Governance - Strangers Cannot Be Kings

[list]Deuteronomy 17:14-15  ~ "When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me; Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother."[/list]


The Law makes a clear case for the following regarding Jews and sojourners/strangers:

[list](a) a sojourner or stranger (a non-native Jew) could not be a Jewish priest
(b) a sojourner or stranger (a non-native Jew) could not be a Jewish king
(c)  a sojourner or stranger (a non-native Jew) could not be a Jewish prophet[/list]

And all those 3 elements were pointing to the very Messiah in Jewish prophecies.

You can see that the Law does not confuse a Jew for a non-Jew; and nowhere in the Law is an Arab included in the covenant of the Jews. Muhammad is not one of the Jews, nor could he have been one of their 'brethren' to rise from among them based on that Jewish covenant. Deedat should have pointed all this to you and told you the plain truth - no, he did not; rather he just trailed off wherever he saw 'brethren' and assumed it applied to Muhammad; yet, not even Muhammad recognized the Jews as his 'brethren', and that is no surprise to see why the Arab Muslims hate the Jews to this day.

@balium

balium:
4) According to Deuteronomy 21:15-17 the traditional rights and privileges of the first born son are not to be affected by the social status of his mother (being a "free" woman such as Sarah, Isaac's mother, or a "Bondwoman" such as Hagar, Ishmael's mother). This is only consistent with the moral and humanitarian principles of all revealed faiths.

Indeed, Deuteronomy 21:15-17 on the rights of inheritance shows that Ishmael was NOT under the Jewish covenants nor did God establish the covenant of Abraham upon the Hagar's son.

In the first place, Deuteronomy 21:15-17 was not discussing the Abrahamic covenant. Secondly, if we look at the inheritance rights in that passage, Ishmael could not have obtained the inheritance of double portion, because Hagar was not the "wife" but a "bondmaid" of Abraham (Galatians 4:22). For this reason, Abraham gave "all that he had" unto Isaac (Gen. 25:5), but gave Hagar just victuals before he sent them away (Gen. 21:14).

Thirdly, under Jewish covenants, the inheritance rights of firstborn might go to another child in the family under certain circumstances - as in the case of Reuben whose inheritance rights of firstborn fell to his nephews, the sons of Joseph (who was himself the 8th among the sons of Jacob - 1 Chron. 2:1-2 and 5:1-2). This is an example where it is declared that "the genealogy is not to be reckoned after the birthright", so your argument in #4 above is untenable.

balium:
5) The full legitimacy of Ishmael as Abraham's son and "seed" and the full legitimacy of his mother, Hagar, as Abraham's wife are clearly stated in Genesis 21:13 and 16:3.

You got it all mixed up and factually wrong again!

Genesis 16:3 comes before 21:13. In that case, we find that even though Sarah had given Hagar to Abraham as 'wife' (Gen. 16:3), such a 'marriage' did not hold - either by custom/tradition or rights of inheritance. For that reason, Hagar was never addressed as Abraham's 'wife', but rather often as bondwoman after that event. See the following -

Genesis 21:13
And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation,
because he is thy seed.

Galatians 4:22
For it is written, that Abraham had two sons,
the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.

It was the same Sarah who called Hagar a 'bondwoman' in Gen. 21:10 even though she had given her previously to Abraham in Gen. 16:3. When she realised the error of what she had done in 16:3, she said to Abraham, "My wrong be upon thee: I have given my maid into thy bosom" (Gen. 16:5) - she recognized that such a move on her part was indeed WRONG, and that was why even after that event, Hagar was never addressed as Abraham's wife.

In Gen. 21:12, God addressed Hagar to Abraham as "thy bondwoman", and not as "thy wife". In the next verse (Gen. 21:13), God also referred to Ishmael as "the son of the bondwoman". In Galatians 4:22, the point is made that Hagar was known as a "bondmaid" rather than as Abraham's wife - and, of course, you did not deny the fact of Hagar being a "bondwoman" in your article:

(being a "free" woman such as Sarah, Isaac's mother, or a "Bondwoman" such as Hagar, Ishmael's mother).

@balium,

Your arguments for Muhammad in the Bible are a repeat dub of the same things we have trashed out in other threads. I've responded in just about the same thing in these other threads -

1.  Muhammad Is Mentioned By The Exact Name In The Gospel Of Barnabas

2.  The Bible Confirms The Messengership Of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)

3.  What The Bible Says About Muhammad S.a.w.

It's funny that when answers are given to these typical Muslim misplaced arguments, we don't read Muslims coming back to give reasoned answers to the rejoinders. Are you guys really holding your horses together or just out to amuse yourselves?

In addition to the answers already provided in those threads outlined above, let me add a few things to your issues in this thread.

balium:
Was the first born son of Abraham (Ishmael) and his descendants included in God's covenant and promise?

It depends on what you mean by "God's covenant and promise". The Bible teaches that the Jewish covenant is not to be confused for other types of covenants found in the Bible. For example, God gave Abraham a covenant which we commonly call the Abrahamic covenant (Gen. 12:7 and [color=Black]15:8[/color]), and we know that God called the nation of Israel to come under that Abraham covenant (see Exo. 6:2-4 and Deut. 1:6-8 et al); whereas, God did not give that covenant to any other 'seed' tracing its ancestry to Abraham (see Genesis 17:20-21 and 21:10-12).

From the above alone, we can see that Ishmael was NOT included in that specific covenant which God gave unto Abraham - and there are other examples throughout the Bible, where particular covenants pertain to a specific nation or group of people and did not include everyone in that group identity (see Exodus 23:32-33 and Duet. 23:3).

balium:
3) In Genesis, ch. 21. Isaac is specifically blessed but Ishmael was also specifically blessed and promised by God to become "a great nation" especially in Genesis 21:13, 18.

Although God specifically blessed both Isaac and Ishmael, yet it was rather with Issac that God established His specific covenant! Please read it for yourself -

Genesis 17:20-21
And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him,
and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly;
twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation.
But my covenant will I establish with Isaac, which Sarah shall
bear unto thee at this set time in the next year.

There is not a single verse in the Bible that says God was going to establish His covenant with Ishmael.

@balium,

balium:
Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in the Old Testament:

The Qur’an mentions in Surah Al-Araf chapter 7 verse 157:

"Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures) in the law and the Gospel".

We don't find Muhammad anywhere in the Law or the Gospels in the Bible.

1.
MUHAMMAD (PBUH) PROPHESISED IN THE BOOK OF DEUTERONOMY:


Almighty God speaks to Moses in Book of Deuteronomy chapter 18 verse 18:

"I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and I will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him."

The Christians say that this prophecy refers to Jesus (pbuh) because Jesus (pbuh) was like Moses (pbuh). Moses (pbuh) was a Jew, as well as Jesus (pbuh) was a Jew. Moses (pbuh) was a Prophet and Jesus (pbuh) was also a Prophet.

Your arguments for Muhammad in the Bible are a repeat dub of the same things we have trashed out in other threads - see The Bible Confirms The Messengership Of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

Perhaps the simply way to answer your thread is to repost my answer from that thread:

---

The foundation of Deuteronomy 18:18 is the Mosaic covenant given to Isreal as found reiterated in Deuteronomy chapter 5 - "The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb", and goes on to show that this covenant was not made with any other nation apart from the Jews. For Deut. 18:18 to have any import, it would have to be based on the covenant which forms its foundation - and that is where we shall try to understand what is meant in that context by 'brethren'.

First, Jews do not receive their prophecies from Arabs - which is why that verse in 18:18 clearly points out.

Second, 'brethren' as used there is one of covenant relationship among all those who are home-born as Jews and can show their pedigree from the families of Israel. Others who lived among them but could not point to any Jewish family ties were called 'sojourners' or 'strangers', not brethren. It is for this reason that two distinct groups were recognized in Israel based upon that covenant: "Whosoever he be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn in Israel" (Lev. 20:2).

Third, it is important for anyone at that time to identify their pedigree - otherwise it would be practically impossible for such a person to know where they stood in relation to the covenant life of Israel. Some of these covenant living include:

[list][li]the feast of the Jews[/li]
[li]political and civil life[/li]
[li]covenant relationships in prophecy[/li][/list]

Where is Muhammad in all that?

But more to the point is that there was only ONE LAW applicable to all who dwelt within Israel (Lev. 24:22); yet, sojourners (that is non-Jewish people dwelling in Israel) could not partake of the feasts of the Jews in exactly the same ceremonial standing as a native Jew. Why? Because when the covenant was made and ratified, it was representing only Jews - "The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day" (Deut. 5:3). So what then does this entail? Look below:

A. Jewish Feasts - Conditions for the Sojourner:

[list]Exodus 12:43-45, 48 ~~ "And the LORD said unto Moses and Aaron, This is the ordinance of the passover: There shall no stranger eat thereof: But every man's servant that is bought for money, when thou hast circumcised him, then shall he eat thereof. A foreigner and an hired servant shall not eat thereof." . . . "And when a stranger shall sojourn with thee, and will keep the passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one that is born in the land: for no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof."[/list]
[list]Exodus 29:33 - "And they shall eat those things wherewith the atonement was made, to consecrate and to sanctify them: but a stranger shall not eat thereof, because they are holy."[/list]
[list]Lev. 22:10 - "There shall no stranger eat of the holy thing: a sojourner of the priest, or an hired servant, shall not eat of the holy thing."[/list]


B. Jewish Political Governance - Strangers Cannot Be Kings

[list]Deuteronomy 17:14-15  ~ "When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me; Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother."[/list]


The Law makes a clear case for the following regarding Jews and sojourners/strangers:

[list](a) a sojourner or stranger (a non-native Jew) could not be a Jewish priest
(b) a sojourner or stranger (a non-native Jew) could not be a Jewish king
(c)  a sojourner or stranger (a non-native Jew) could not be a Jewish prophet[/list]

And all those 3 elements were pointing to the very Messiah in Jewish prophecies.

You can see that the Law does not confuse a Jew for a non-Jew; and nowhere in the Law is an Arab included in the covenant of the Jews. Muhammad is not one of the Jews, nor could he have been one of their 'brethren' to rise from among them based on that Jewish covenant. Deedat should have pointed all this to you and told you the plain truth - no, he did not; rather he just trailed off wherever he saw 'brethren' and assumed it applied to Muhammad; yet, not even Muhammad recognized the Jews as his 'brethren', and that is no surprise to see why the Arab Muslims hate the Jews to this day.

chakula:
have you ever witnessed a scene that a non muslim stoned or got his head cutted because he has a contact or touch the qur'an?

Perhaps there's such an incident:

Teacher beat to death by mob of Muslim students in her classroom

The details of Christianah's death are shocking.

Christianah was supervising an all-girl class while they were taking an Islamic Religious Knowledge examination, a routine job by any teacher's standards the world over.

. . .

One of the girls responded by starting to cry and was soon telling her classmates that there had been a copy of the Quran in her bag left in front of the classroom.

The girl claimed that because Christianah was a Christian, she had desecrated the Quran by touching it.
______________

(1) http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/cover032907.htm

(2) http://www.christianpost.com/article/20070326/nigeria-christian-teacher-killed-by-muslim-student-mob/index.html

Once again, what has been demonstrated here is that your Muslim scholars are caught trying to bend the Quran to fit 7 layers of the earth's atmosphere. They did a very poor job, aside from confusing themselves on the various sources they gathered for their article. We have seen that the earth's atmosphere is divided into more than 7 layers; and even more than that, we know the Quran was ot speaking about the layers of the earth's atmosphere in those verses about 'seven heavens'.

At the end of the day, we are still waiting for the remaining SIX EARTHS of allah in the Quran 65:12 who claimed to have created SEVEN EARTHS. If no muslim can find the other six earths, the Quran simply got it factually wrong.

(3)  Your Muslim scholar confuses the structure of the Atmosphere -

experts:
According to the modern geological definitions the seven layers of atmosphere are as follows:

1. Troposphere
2. Stratosphere
3. Mesosphere
4. Thermosphere
5. Exosphere
6. Ionosphere
7. Magnetosphere

Sorry, but 'modern geology' does not define the earth's atmosphere to be only seven layers.

Basically, the structure of the earth's atmosphere is defined in various ways, depending on particular references and the purpose(s) of any atmospheric study. For instance, we have seen already that there are various layers forecast by different numerical prediction models for different applications. Some of the models are used to forecast 3 layers, others are used to forecast 12 layers, and yet others for 16 layers.

From this, it is obvious that there are more than 7 layers of the earth's atmosphere:

[list]1.  sometimes you might find a very general/broad classification of the atmosphere between the lower part (homosphere) and the upper part (heterosphere);[/list]

[list]2. inbetween those two layers are further divisions into a general 5 layers: troposphere, stratosphere, mesosphere, thermosphere, and exosphere;[/list]

[list]3. if more detailed studies are involved, a further delineation is made where we find other layers inbetween the broad categorizations above (eg., ozonosphere, ionosphere, and magnetosphere).[/list]

[list]You may find this article from [url=http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Earth's_atmosphere]New World Encyclopedia[/url] helpful.[/list]

To tie it all up together, the earth's atmosphere is not made of only 7 layers - there are far more than that number, and depending on the detail involved in any study, we find the following list of more than 7 layers  -

[list][li]chemosphere[/li]
[li]exosphere[/li]
[li]heterosphere[/li]
[li]homosphere[/li]
[li]ionosphere[/li]
[li]magnetosphere[/li]
[li]mesosphere[/li]
[li]neutrosphere[/li]
[li]ozonosphere[/li]
[li]peplosphere[/li]
[li]pasmasphere[/li]
[li]stratosphere[/li]
[li]substratosphere[/li]
[li]thermosphere[/li]
[li]troposphere[/li][/list]

The list above of 15 layers above is not the total number of the layers of the earth's atmosphere (they are just the ones I remember for now off the top of my head and arranged alphabetically). You can check them out to verify that I'm not trying to hoodwink you by any means; and then you will find that your muslim scholars indeed have got it all mixed up and patently wrong to assert only 7 layers!

Carefully check the pic below - you will find more than 7 layers identified both on the right and left hand sides of the pic:

[list][img]http://www.kowoma.de/en/gps/additional/atmosphere_02.jpg[/img][/list]

[list]There are at least ten layers there:[/list]

[list]on the right side -
¹homosphere, ²heterosphere, ³ozonosphere, ⁴ionosphere;[/list]

[list]and on the left side -
⁵planetary boundary layer (PBL), ⁶troposphere,
⁷stratosphere, ⁸mesosphere, ⁹thermosphere, ¹⁰exosphere.[/list]

(2)  Your Muslim scholar confuses the sources he cites -

experts:
Today, it is known that the world's atmosphere consists of different layers that lie on top of each other.¹⁹ Based on the criteria of chemical contents or air temperature, the definitions made have determined the atmosphere of the earth as seven layers.²⁰ According to the "Limited Fine Mesh Model (LFMMII)," a model of atmosphere used to estimate weather conditions for 48 hours, the atmosphere is also 7 layers.

It's sad to note that your muslim scholar has confused the gist of the references in the footnotes (19 [inactive] and 20) in the quote above. Both are given as:

[list]

¹⁹ Michael Pidwirny, “Atmospheric Layers,” 1996,
http://royal.okanagan.bc.ca/mpidwirn/atmosphereandclimate/atmslayers.html

²⁰ “Numerical Prediction Models used by NWS,” Integrated Publishing,
www.tpub.com/weather3/4-27.htm.

[/list]

According to the second link [20], we find that the "Limited Fine Mesh Model (LFMMII)" does not define the earth's atmosphere to be only 7 layers. The first thing we read there is that, "NWS currently uses several different numerical prediction models for different applications." The models discussed there include:

          ~  Limited Fine Mesh Model II
          ~  Nested Grid Model
          ~  Spectral Model
          ~  Three-Layer Global Model
          ~  Barotropic Mesh Model

This is what it says about the "Limited Fine Mesh Model (LFMMII)" -

[list]

The Limited Fine Mesh Model II (LFMII) is still used for many 48-hour forecasts. (These are called short-range forecasts. ) Basically, it forecasts seven layers of the atmosphere: a planetary-boundary layer 50 millibars (about 1,500 feet) above the surface; three evenly spaced layers in the troposphere, including a layer at the tropopause level; and three evenly spaced layers in the stratosphere, with the top layer at 50-millibars. See figure 4-3-1 for a diagram of the layer structure of the LFMII model. Forecasts at each layer are done on a grid with grid points about 116 kilometers apart at 45° latitude.

[/list]

When you check the figure 4-3-1and read further, you find how many layers each model forecasts:

          ~  Limited Fine Mesh Model II (LFMII) - forecasts 7 layers
          ~  Spectral Model (SM) - forecasts 12 layers
          ~  Nested Grid Model (NGM) - forecasts 16 layers
          ~  Three-Layer Global Model (3LGM) - forecasts 3 layers
          ~  Barotropic Mesh Model (BMM) - forecasts jet-stream movement

None of these models concludes that the entire earth's atmosphere is composed of either 7, 12, 16, or 3 layers. Instead, the number of layers they forecast is what is stated in the article on that page.

If you take the case of the "Limited Fine Mesh Model II (LFMII)", for example, it is said to forecast the following layers:

          ~  a planetary-boundary layer (PBL)
          ~  three evenly spaced layers in the troposphere
          ~  three evenly spaced layers in the stratosphere

Anyone can easily see that all the above DO NOT include the spheres higher than the stratosphere (such as the mesosphere, thermosphere, exosphere or magnetosphere). In other words, the 7 layers which the "Limited Fine Mesh Model II (LFMII)" forecasts occur in just two layers: the troposphere and the stratosphere. The planetary-boundary layer (PBL) is the bottom layer of the troposphere that is in contact with the surface of the earth.

These all show that your muslim scholar was confusing what he read about the "Limited Fine Mesh Model II (LFMII)" and had assumed that the '7 layers' which the LFMII forecasts are the totality of the earth's atmosphere. Duh! He should have wondered what was meant by the '16 layers' and '12 layers' of the atmosphere forecast by the NGM and SM respectively, instead of confusing the '7 layers' of the LFMII for what it does not mean.

@experts,

Your reply above ^^ in post #68 is yet another copy-and-paste from various muslim sites; see, for example: QuranSource and HarunYahaya. Yet, it has huge holes which I'd like to address in just 3 basic points below.

Before I address them on 3 points, let me make a few observations:

experts:
The sky, described in the verse as being in layers, is without doubt the most perfect expression of the atmosphere. It is a great miracle that these facts, which could not possibly be discovered without the technology of the 20th century, were explicitly stated by the Qur'an 1,400 years ago.

The problem is that the Quran was not speaking about any layers of the atmosphere or the sky in the verses where we read of 'seven heavens'. The technologies used today for meteorological and atmospherical studies reveal that the earth's atmosphere is divided into more than 12 layers, depending on the purposes and detail of any atmospheric study.  If, therefore, the Quran was speaking about 'seven layers' where we read 'seven heavens', then the Quran is factually wrong again!


Now, as to the three points to deal with your cut-and-paste reply:

(1)  Your Muslim scholar confuses 'seven heavens' for 'layers of earth's atmosphere' -

experts:
The word "heavens," which appears in many verses in the Qur'an, is used to refer to the sky above the Earth, as well as the entire universe. Given this meaning of the word, it is seen that the Earth's sky, or the atmosphere, is made up of seven layers.

The idea above is riddled with huge problems. Besides chapter 65:12, the Quran in several verses speaks about "seven heavens" [see Quran (2:29); (17:44); (23:86); (41:12); (67:3); and (71:15)]. In none of those verses does Allah speak about 'seven layers' of the earth's sky or atmosphere. In fact, Q. 2:29 would be patently wrong to assert that there are "seven regular heavens" because we know that the earth's atmosphere is NOT regular in its structure.

Secondly, 'heavens' cannot fit the meaning of 'universe' in the Quran - otherwise we would be reading 'seven regular universes' in Q. 2:29, or 'seven universes ~ one above another' in Q. 71:15. From these alone, we already see that your copy-and paste argument started off on the wrong footing!

^^ commander nuclearboy .[color=Black].[/color]. that thing about 'deliverance' - I have lost count of being told of my 'need' thereto.

Hehehe - but toneyb's cool. He's not gone away - just hanging around, I trust.

experts:
Development of Scientific Facts

The Three Layer -Theory did not last for so long due to recent discoveries in Geology. Recent measurements and experiments showed that the material comprising the nucleus of the Earth is under very high pressure, three million times more than that on the surface of the Earth.

The Quran was not talking about any "three layers theory" or even "seven layers hypothesis". The Quran rather claimed that Allah created SEVEN EARTHS. Period.

experts:
Under such pressure, matter transforms into solid state, this in turn makes Earth’s core very solid,This core is surrounded by a liquid layer of very high temperature. This means that there are two layers in Earth’s core and not one.Two layers; one solid in the center surrounded by another liquid layer.

Like above.

experts:
Thereafter measuring devices advanced and presented to scientists a clear distinction among Earth’s inner layers. If we were to descend under the earth’s crust we would find another layer of very hot stones , which is the stone cover or wrap. After that come three other distinct layers of varying density, pressure and temperature.

The Quran was not talking about "layers" of the Earth. So please cut to the chase.

experts:
Therefore scientists found themselves classifying the layers of Earth into seven layers, not more.

That is the usual thing you will find among Muslim apologists and nowhere else. ,  it is just like a native dialect with you people, and that is why every time you post something in this thread, I just know I've seen it somewhere in a Muslim forum or blog, hehe.

The whole argument you posted here is NOT your own - again, you plagiarised it from another muslim site. I don't know which one in particular, but I know that it appears in many Muslim sites. Try MissionMuslim for instance, and you will see the exact same thing!

Let me put your arguments to rest.

If one has to consider what exactly your course means by 'seven layers', we find a few things wrong. Basic among all this is that your author is confusing the various elements of the earth's structure in a needlessly repeated fashion in order to arrive at "seven layers" where there should basically have been four or five (depending on how you want to study the structure of the earth).

Here is another list of the structure of the earth in terms of "layers" -


Earth's Layer [url=http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_Earth%27s_layers]from WikiAnswers[/url]:

The Crust:
* Continental Crust
* Oceanic Crust
The Mantle:
* Upper Mantle
* Lithosphere
* Asthenosphere
* Transition Zone
* The Lower Mantle
* The D'' area
The Core:
* Outer Core
* Inner Core

From the above, if you have to count all "layers" (regardless of their composition), you're looking at no less than TEN LAYERS, not 'seven'.

Can you then tell me what on earth your Muslim interpreters mean by this -

[list]Hilali-Khan:
"It is Allah Who has created seven heavens and of the earth the like thereof (i.e. seven). .[color=Black].[/color]. "

Khalifa:
"GOD created seven universes and the same number of earths. .[color=Black].[/color]. "[/list]

Your Quran does not say "seven layers" but rathe SEVEN EARTHS. Even if you want to refer to the layers of the earth in terms of its composition, dude you need to update and see that scientists speak of no less that TEN layers.

Where are Allah's remaining SIX EARTHS since the Quran is claiming SEVEN EARTHS on his behalf?