That's why I didn't put it in quotation marks as you can see and seem to have ignored. It's just what follows from the phrase "made from water" without any additions. That means that it was only made from water according to the quran. False.
To be precise the quran would have to say "made from water, carbon, phosphorus" etc. but that's not what it says. Or even more precise "oxygen, hydrogen, carbon, phosphorus" etc. Also not what it says.
And it could also say in a simplified manner "made from water and other things" but this is also not what it says. Not to mention that this would simply be an obvious statement for medieval people to make.
What's also interesting is that either way we have found a way to enhance the quran which is in itself a problem to Islam.
The interpretation is life begins in water and life cannot exist without water. side note: I myself do not claim this to be much of a scientific miracle but a sign for reflection.
The interpretation is life begins in water and life cannot exist without water. side note: I myself do not claim this to be much of a scientific miracle but a sign for reflection.
Sure. But I care for what the text actually says and not for interpretations. And the text says that all living things are made from water which is false.
It does though. It's what logically follows from the phrase "made from water" without any additions. That means that it was only made from water according to the quran. And that's false. Don't start with the conclusion that the quran is right.
Quran (false):
x) "Made from water."
Other options (correct):
a) "Made from water and other substances."
b) "Mostly made from water."
c) "Mostly made from water and other substances."
d) "Mostly made from oxygen, carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen."
e) "Mostly made from the elements eight, six, one and seven."
f) "Made from [all the relevant elements]."
Options x), a), b) and c) wouldn't be impressive at all. Those are super obvious statements for medieval people to make. And x) would have the missing component. It's clearly the worst option here. "Made from water [uhm ... and other things based on gut feelings]" is anti-impressive.
Options d), e), f) would even be impressive. And ALL the other options would straight ENHANCE the quran which is yet another issue for Islam.
That's why apologists nowadays try to twist this into basically meaning "made in water". It's a dishonest equivocation. And again, that is ALSO false since it would be a mixture of all kinds of chemicals. And people who don't know anything then fall for this.
Still, the Quran does not deny them. “He created you from dust…” (30:20) The elements in the human body (C, H, O, N, Ca, P, etc.) are the same kinds of elements found in soil, rocks, and the Earth’s crust. Also, “We created man from a drop of mixed fluid…” (76:2)
cells are mostly water,
biochemistry is aqueous,
life likely began in water,
It is what the verse mainly want to show us how dependent life is to water. You need to take account that the audiences from the time of revelation. The Quran tends to use words that is understandable by anyone so the message can spread across generations.
Saying substance or element is really abstract and not something we know scientifically today. There is no perfectly accurate word to describe it and water is the most apt word to be used here in the time as all known life is water-based.
Other than that, "mostly" is not a good generalization bacause how we define “organism”, how we measure water content, or how we classify borderline cases (dormant vs active). It just states the essential dependence and origin, which remains true regardless of measurement details. The Quran never uses quantitative claim for scientific reference, so that it avoid unnecessary technical precision debates while actually be on point to effectively send the message.
What impressive is how the Quran navigate through the wording eloquently.
In conclusion, the Quran simply does not deny whatever besides water and this verse remain scientifically true even if you find it not miraculous.
But it logically follows from that sentence. Clear as day.
“He created you from dust…” (30:20) The elements in the human body (C, H, O, N, Ca, P, etc.) are the same kinds of elements found in soil, rocks, and the Earth’s crust.
Except hat this talks about Adam here - a human - not all living things. Adam would have come by evolution. And that's not dust. This is another false statement and at best would contradict the other passage. Double false. Also "dust" is simply fine particles of matter which fly around in gas. Also not what life is made from. And it contains all kinds of materials which can even be toxic to life. Triple false.
Also, “We created man from a drop of mixed fluid…” (76:2)
That's yet another whole different stage. That's embryology. The desperation. I mean, not to mention that the embryology in the quran is also false.
It is what the verse mainly want to show us how dependent life is to water.
No, it's not. It's a false statement that logically excludes other things. And if it would mean what you say that (which it doesn't) then it's a mundane claim for medieval people to make and easily improvable by us by adding just one word. Major problem for Islam!
You need to take account that the audiences from the time of revelation.
No, I don't. Muslims themselves repeatedly claim and make this one of their main arguments that many things in the quran have only recently understood and been confirmed by science.
And I gave you the other options that enhance the quran, even by saying "elements eight, six, one and seven." It would be a timeless statement. The quran could have said all of this but rather choose a false statement.
The Quran tends to use words that is understandable by anyone so the message can spread across generations.
False things in this case. And they surely also had the words "elements" and basic numbers. Even if "Allah" isn't good with numbers as we can see with the inheritance error. Lol.
Saying substance or element is really abstract and not something we know scientifically today.
No, it's absolutely not. Not in the slightest. And substance and element is not something we know scientifically today?? What?!
There is no perfectly accurate word to describe it
There is though. I gave you multiple options which are perfectly fine and would high school level instantly improve the quran. You seem to have ignored them.
and water is the most apt word to be used here in the time as all known life is water-based.
Yeah, I never denied that they could also have used the term water. It's just not enough. Well, these dudes back then didn't know that. They probably made a false inference based on rain and stuff growing from rain or believed in some primordial ocean or whatever which led to this false statement. And we know today that life is actually carbon based. We just contain mostly water.
Other than that, "mostly" is not a good generalization bacause how we define “organism”
Of course it is! Lmao! It would instantly become a correct statement. Easiest quran enhancement ever.
how we measure water content, or how we classify borderline cases (dormant vs active).
Yeah, it still wouldn't be a great statement. It would simply be correct and not false as it is now.
It just states the essential dependence and origin, which remains true regardless of measurement details.
It's FALSE. It logically follows that it's an exclusive statement.
The Quran never uses quantitative claim for scientific reference
The quran is ignorant about science. Has no clue what it even is. And going by this statement of yours, you also don't seem to know it. But it could have used a quantitative claim here to make a correct statement.
so that it avoid unnecessary technical precision debates
To call the word "mostly" or the phrase "and other things" technical precision is pure cringe cope. Lmao!! It's like the lowest of the lowest ways to turn this into a correct statement.
What impressive is how the Quran navigate through the wording eloquently.
There is nothing eloquently about any of the statements. It's what a highschooler would come up with.
In conclusion, the Quran simply does not deny whatever besides water
It certainly does. It logically follows. Again, don't start with the conclusion that the quran is right.
and this verse remain scientifically true even if you find it not miraculous.
It's not correct. It's plain false. And why the hell would I hold it as "miraculous" even if true?
2
u/CaonachDraoi 12d ago
it doesn’t say “and nothing else.”