If any book is claimed to be from God, it should not contradict modern science,do u agree with this?

Question

if u agree to this.

just click here.and test how strong u r in ur decision!

www.sunnahonline.com/ilm/quran/qms.pdf

Answer 1

I think that the stuff that says we come from monkeys and mountains are formed by certain stuff is a lie.God made anything and everything.  

Answer 2

look of course there compatible all religion really are its just people will not admit it i mean just because you know how its works and how its made does not mean the Creator dose not exist like a computer a computer engineer who knows how a computer works does not belive IBM doesn't exist or hp or dell ,does it so?, why a scientist, all riligions are basicly the same cristianity musslime jewish they all basicly evolve from the god Yahweh or (יְהֹוָה)

Answer 3

Wow, a whole topic full of people making excuses.

Oh how I'd love to live in a time when people went with the most rational conclusion rather than always trying to twist things to fit what they've already concluded.

Answer 4

Just because a book does not contradict science doesn't mean it was from God.

My biology textbook doesn't contradict science, but if I wrote "To humanity, Love God" on the inside cover, that does not make it divinely-inspired.

There is zero evidence for the existance of God, and plenty of evidence that He does not exist (at least, not as described in any religious texts).

Answer 5

<<if any book is claimed to be from God, it should not contradict modern science,do u agree with this?>>

If somebody wants to claim the complete works of Erich von Däniken are in fact from an author called God, and they don't mind the apparent contradictions, then I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to do so.  Therefore, your premise appears flawed.  Furthermore, modern science is fully prepared to contradict areas of modern science itself, should a better explanation of the evidence become available.

Answer 6

Well it entirely depends on what you mean by 'contradict'.  Science does not tell us there is no God.  The books attributed to the word of God do not claim science is false.  True, we can't always reconcile the apparent truth of science with the apparent meaning of ancient religious texts, but no one is demanding that we must.   (Well some people do, but they miss the point.  Science and religion make no such demands of one another). Science, and the scientific method is gift from God, a fruit of God's gift of intellect and sentient awareness.  Why would God instill in us the drive to learn, to discover, to answer, if all of the there was know was handed to us in a book?  In way it was.  Our world is that book.  We are still learning to read it.

Answer 7

If any book is claimed to have truth in it, and it contradicts modern science, it could still be true.  Modern science has been wrong in the past, and will continue to be at least partly wrong for at least the near future.

But if a book has a passing reference to how the diameter of a well was 10 and the circumference was 30, it could easily be an approximation, not an error.  And if it's not a primary goal of the text, it does not need to diminish the rest of the text.  It doesn't matter much if it's the Bible or an instructional text book.

Most of the text books I've used have had at least some errors. They don't claim to be divinely inspired, but they do replace previous textbooks that also had errors, without apparent improvement.

A common claim for the Bible is that it is divinely inspired, but written by people.  Various translations typically have typographic errors.  One expects translation errors.  And, they are not translated from original texts.  Original texts are probably lost.  Translations are performed from copies, often multiple copies, which often differ from each other.

The path to truth in science or religion is difficult.

Answer 8

I agree that just anyone can claim that a book is from God.  That is the essence of democracy and no one can preven enyone from making such claim.  Of course no can also force anyone else to agree that such claim is true.  Anyway, such claim that it came from God does not atll make it imperative that the book should not contradict modern science.  In the first place, upon what authority would is it based that a book from God does not contradict modern science? There is no basis for such premises and therefore it can not be the basis of your hypothesis.  The Bible is a book inspired by God as many people in the world believe but modern science which came later contradicts many of the Bible' teachings.  It is a matter of faith and belief however whether or not such contradictions are worthy of credence.

Answer 9

I do not. I believe modern scince should not contridict with what God says. God made everything, and he knows how everything works. And if you think about it, God doesn't contridict with us. It's US who argue with Him. We have tried to prove that man came from monkey. They may have the same habbits as humans, and look like them as well, but there are so many problems with that theory. If we came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys around? We would be the ones around not them, because we came from them. But nooo they are still here, and don't look much like humans. We did not evolve from monkeys, I can tell you that.

If you would just read the Bible, you will see that it tells soooo many things that have already happened, and will continue to happen.

Answer 10

I would say exactly the opposite. Any source claimed to be from a deity is based on an utterly unscientific assumption. I have never seen one which was scientific OR correct -- especially this Quran nonsense.

Answer 11

All   so called       God sent books contain only information that was known to humans at that time.America the continenet is not mentioned in any holy books because it was unknown at that time!

Answer 12

The Hold Bible was not written by God. Would an "all-knowing all seeing, all loving man" endorse slavery, torture, and cruelty?

And the Bible does not agree with science at all, which means that it is not true because it defies the very fundamental laws of science.

Answer 13

The books claimed to be from God are thousands of years old.  If you truly believe that God dictated the books to people, then don't you think He would speak in terms that the people would understand?  People didn't know what "millions of years" means, nor relativity, geologic records and plate tectonics, evolution, etc.  A reasonable God would speak in analogies that simple ancient people would be able to understand.  Let's call it "seven days" because that is easier for people to understand than 14.3 billion years.  And ultimately, it's not a truth or lie or anything like that.  Before the earth, what was a day? For God it could have been a couple billion years. There wasn't even language for those concepts, so how could they have been recorded in books?  Maybe God shared the secrets of the universe with Moses et al., but the words were never there to record them, so Moses et al. just did the best they could to record them.  Language and communication are simply imprecise.  I think God transcends the exact meanings of a few human words--to limit God to the available human languages of communication thousands of years ago is to seriously underestimate God, I think.  Don't think of it as a contradiction and rather think of it as changes in the human ability to communicate over the years--then you'd be more open to the true miracles of the universe that God probably wishes you could see, if only you could get beyond your old books.