Scientific Errors
based on a live debate between
Dr. Zakir Naik (a physician & a scholar on Islam)
&
Dr. William Campbell (a physician & a scholar on Christianity)
Dr. Zakir Naik says:
First, we deal with Astronomy . The Bible speaks about the creation of the universe. In the beginning, 1 st Book, Book of
Genesis, 1st Ch., it is mentioned - It says… ‘Almighty God created the Heavens and the Earth, in six days and talks about a
evening and a morning, referring to a 24 - hour day. Today scientists tell us, that the universe cannot be created in a 24
hour period of six days. Qur’an too speaks about six ‘ayyams’ . The Arabic word singular is ‘yaum’ plural is ‘ayyam’ . It can
either mean a day of 24 hours, or it is a very long period, an ‘yaum’ , an epoch. Scientists say we have no objection in
agreeing that the universe - it could have been created in 6 very long periods.
Point No.2 - Bible says in Genesis Ch. No. 1 Verses No. 3 and 5,…‘Light was created on the first day.’ Genesis, Ch., 1 Verses,
14 to 19… ‘The cause of light - stars and the sun, etc. was created on the fourth day’. How can the cause of light be created
on the 4th day - later than the light which came into existence on the first day? - It is unscientific.
Point No.3 - Further, the, Bible says Genesis, Ch. 1, Verses 9 to 13… ‘Earth was created on the 3 rd day. How can you have a
night and day without the earth ? The day depends upon the rotation of the Earth Without the earth created, how can you
have a night and day?
Point No..4 - Genesis, Ch. No. 1 Verses 9 to 13 says… ‘Earth was created on the third day.’ Genesis Ch. No. 1 Verses 14 to 19
says…‘The Sun and the Moon were created on the fourth day.’ Today science tells us… ‘Earth is part of the parent body…
the sun.’ It cannot come into existence before the sun – It is unscientific.
Point No. 5 - The Bible says in Genesis, Ch. No.1, Verse No. 11 to 13…‘The vegetation, the herbs the shrubs, the trees - they
were created on the 3 rd day And the Sun, Genesis, Ch. No. 1, Verses. 14 to 19, was created on the 4 th day. How can the
vegetation come into existence without sunlight, and how can they survive without sunlight ?
Point No.6 - The Bible says in Genesis, Ch. 1, Verses No.16, that…‘God created two lights the greater light, the Sun to rule
the day, and the lesser light the Moon, to rule the night. The actual translation, if you go to the Hebrew text, it is
‘lamps’…‘Lamps having lights of its own.’ And that you will come to know better, if you read both the Verses – Genesis, Ch.
No.1, Verse. 16, as well as 17. Verse No.17 says…‘And Almighty God placed them in the firmament, to give light to the
earth… To give light to the earth.’ Indicating, that Sun and the Moon has its own light - which is in contradiction with
established scientific knowledge that we have. There are certain people who try and reconciliate, and say that the six days
mentioned in the Bible , it actually refers to epocs - like the Qur’an long periods - not six, 24 hour day. It is illogical - you
read in the Bible , evening, morning - It clearly states 24 hours, it indicates. But even if I use the concordance approach - no
problem. I agree with your illogical argument - Yet they will only be able to solve the 1 st scientific error of 6 days creation,
and second, of first day ‘light’ and 3 rd day ‘earth.’ The remaining four, yet they cannot solve. Some further say that… ‘If it
is a 24-hour period, why cannot the vegetables survive for one 24 hour day without sunlight?’ I say ‘Fine - If you say that
the vegetables were created before the sun, and can survive for one 24-hour day, I have got no objection. But you cannot
say the days mentioned are 24 hours as well as epochs - You cannot have the cake and eat it, both. If you say it is long
period, you solve Point No.1 and 3, the remaining 4 are yet there. If you say the days are 24 hours day, you solve only Point
No.5 - the remaining 5 are yet there - It becomes unscientific. I leave it to Dr. William Campbell, whether he wants to say…
‘It is long period’, and say that there are only 4 scientific errors - or say… ‘It is a 24 hour day’, and say there is only 5
scientific errors in the creation of the universe.
Point No. 7 - Regarding the concept of Earth, there are various Scientists who have described… ‘How will the world end.’
Hypothesis - Some may be right, some may be wrong. But either the world will perish or the world will live forever. Both
cannot take place simultaneously – It is unscientific. But this is exactly what the Bible says. It is mentioned in the Bible , in
the book of Hebrews, Ch. No.1 Verses No.10 and 11, and the book of Psalms, Ch. No.102, Verse No.25 and 26,
that…‘Almighty God created the Heavens and the Earth, and they will perish.’ Exactly opposite is mentioned in the book of
Ecclesiastics, Ch. No.1, Verse No.4, and the book of Psalms, Ch. No.78, Verse No.69, that… ‘The earth will abide forever.’ I
leave it to Dr. William Campbell to choose which of the two Verses are unscientific - the first pair or the second pair. One
has to be unscientific - Both cannot take place. The world cannot abide forever as well as perish – It is unscientific.
Point No. 8 - Regarding ‘the Heavens’ , the Bible says in Job, Ch. 26, Verse 11, that…‘The pillars of the Heaven will tremble.’
Qur’an says in Surah Luqman, Ch. 31, Verse No.10, that…‘The Heavens are without any pillars - Don`t you see? Don’t you
see the Heavens are without any pillars? - Bible says heaven have got pillars.
Point No. 9 - Not only do the Heavens have got pillars - Bible says in the first book of Samuel, Ch. No.2 Verses No.8, as well
as the book of Job Ch. No.9, Verse No.6, and the book of Psalms Ch. No.75, Verse No.3, that… ‘Even the earth have got
pillars.’
Point No. 10 - In the field of ‘Diet and Nutrition’ lets analyse, what does the Bible say. The Bible says in the book of
Genesis, Ch. No.1, Verse No.29, that… ‘God has given you all the herbs bearing seeds, the trees bearing fruits - those that
bear seed, as meat for you.’ New International Version says… ‘The seed bearing plants, and the trees bearing fruits bearing
seeds are food for you, all of them.’ Today, even a layman knows that there are several poisonous plants like wild berries,
stritchi, datura, plants containing alkaloid, polyander, bacaipoid - that which if you ingest, if you eat there are high
possibilities you may die. How come the Creator of the universe and the human beings, does not know, that if you have
these plants, you will die. I hope Dr. William Campbell does not give these vegetarian diet to his patients.
Point No. 11 - The Bible has a scientific test how to identify a true believer. It is mentioned in the Gospel of Mark, Ch.
No.16, Verse No.17 and 18 - It says that… ‘There will be signs for true believers and among the signs - In my name they
shall cast out devils, they shall speak foreign tongues, new tongues, they shall take up serpents - And if they drink deadly
poison, they shall not be harmed - And when they place their hand over the sick, they shall be cured.’ This is a scientific
test - In scientific terminology, it is known as the ‘confirmatory test’ for a true Christian believer. In the past 10 years of my
life, I have personally interacted with thousands of Christians, including missionaries - I have not come across a single
Christian, who has passed this confirmatory test of the Bible. I have not come across a single Christian who took poison - I
have not come across any who took poison, and who has not died. And in scientific terminology, this is also called as the
‘falsification test’ That means if a false person tries and does this test… takes poison, he will die. And a false person will not
dare attempt this test - If you are not a true Christian believer, you will not dare attempt this test. Because you try and
attempt the falsification test, you will fail. So a person who is not a true Christian believer, will never attempt this test. I
have read the book ‘The Qur’an and the Bible in the light of history and science’ written by Dr. William Campbell. And I
assume - that he is a true Christian believer, and at least I would like him to confirm to me about the falsification test.
Please be rest assured… Please be rest assured, I will not ask Dr. William Campbell to have deadly poison - Because I don’t
want to jeopardize the debate. What I’ll do - I will only ask him to speak in foreign tongues… In new languages. And as
many of you may be aware that India is a land, which has more than 1000 languages and dialects. Only thing I request him
is, to say these 3 words… ‘One hundred rupees’, in the 17 official languages. There are only 17 official languages in India
and to make it easier for Dr. William Campbell, I have got a ‘One hundred-rupee note.’ And this has all the 17 languages
mentioned here. Besides English and Hindi, I will help him. I give him a beginning –‘Ek sav rupaiya, In Hindi. The
remaining 15 languages are here - I request him to read. I know the test says… ‘They will speak foreign languages on their
own, without the help of reading’ - but I want to make the test easier, I want to see someone passing the test - I’ve not seen
any one. So if he cannot say it on his own, or from his memory, at least read it. I don’t mind I’ll accept it. And I would
request the chairperson to give it to Dr. William Campbell. He has his rebuttal - 15 languages, ‘Ek sav rupaiya’… 3 words
only. What does the Bible say regarding ‘Hydrology’? Bible says in Genesis, Ch. No.9, Verse No.13 to 17, that… ‘After God, at
the time of Noah submerged the world by flood, and after the flood’ subsided, He said… ‘I put up a rainbow in the sky as a
promise to the humankind never to submerge the world again, by water. To the unscientific person it may be quite good…
‘Oh rainbow is a sign of Almighty God, never to submerge the world by flood again.’ But today we know very well, that
rainbow is due to the refraction of sunlight, with rain or mist. Surely there must have been thousands of rainbows before
the time of Noah, peace be upon him. To say it was not there before Noah’s time you have to assume that the law of
refraction did not exist - which is unscientific.’
Point No. 12 - In the field of medicine , the Bible says in the book of Leveticus, Ch. No.14, Verse No.49 to 53 - it gives a
novel way for disinfecting a house from plague of leprosy… disinfecting a house from plague of leprosy. It says that…
‘Take two birds, kill one bird, take wood, scale it - and the other living bird, dip it in water… and under running water -
later on sprinkle the house 7 times with it. Sprinkle the house with blood to disinfect against plague of leprosy? You know
blood is a good media of germs, bacteria, as well as toxin - I hope Dr. William Campbell does not use this method of
disinfecting the OT, the operation theatre.
Point No. 13 - It is mentioned in the book of Leveticus, Ch. No.12, Verse No.1 to 5, and we know medically, that after a
mother gives birth to a child, the post-partal period, it is unhygienic. To say it is ‘unclean’, Religiously - I have got no
objection. But Leviticus, Ch. No.12 Verse No.1 to 5, says that… ‘After a woman gives birth to a male child, she will be
unclean for 7 days, and the period of uncleanliness will continue for 33 days more. If she gives birth to a female child, she
will be unclean for two weeks, and the period of uncleanliness will continue for 66 days. In short, if a woman gives birth to
a male child… ‘a son’, she is unclean for 40 days. If she gives birth to a female child… ‘a daughter’, she is unclean for 80
days. I would like Dr. William Campbell to explain to me scientifically, how come a woman remains unclean for double the
period, if she gives birth to a female child, as compared to a male child.
Point No. 14 - The Bible also has a very good test for adultery - How to come to know a woman has committed adultery. In
the book of Numbers, Ch. no.5 Verse No..11 to 31, I’ll just say in brief, it says that… ‘The priest should take holy water in a
vessel, take dust from the floor, and put it into the vessel - And that is the bitter water ‘And after cursing it, give it to the
woman And if the woman has committed adultery, after she drinks it, the curse will enter her body, the stomach will swell,
the thigh will rot, and she shall be cursed by the people. If the woman has not committed adultery, she will remain clean
and she will bear the seed. A novel method of identifying whether a woman has committed adultery or not. You know
today in the world, there are thousands of cases pending in different parts of the world, in different courts of law - only on
the assumption that someone has alleged that a woman has committed adultery. I had read in the newspapers, and I came
to know from the media, that the President of this great country Mr. Bill Clinton, he was involved in a sex scandal about 2
years back. I wonder, that why did not the American court use this ‘bitter water test’ for adultery? He would have gone
scot-free immediately. Why did not the Christian missionaries of this great country, specially those who are in the medical
field like my respected Dr. William Campbell, use this bitter water test to bail out their President, immediately.
Point No. 15 - ‘Mathematics’ is a branch, which is closely associated with science, with which you can solve problems, etc.
There are thousands of contradictions in the Bible - hundreds deal with mathematics, and I’ll first touch on few of them. It
is mentioned in Ezra, Ch. No.2, Verse No.1, and Nehemiah, Ch. No.7, Verse No.6, the context that… ‘When the people
returned from exile, from Babylon, when king Nebucheldeser of Babylon, when he released the men from Israel, they
came back from captivity’ - and the list of the people are given. The list is given in Ezra, Ch. No.2, Verse No.2 to 63, and
Nehemiah Ch. No.7, Verse No.7 up to 65; the list is given with the names as well as number of people released. In these 60
Verses there are no less than 18 times - the name is exactly the same but the number is different. There are no less than 18
contradictions in less than 60 Verses, of these two Chapters. This is the list - I don’t have time to run through the list - There
are no less than 18 different contradictions in less than 60 Verses.
Point No. 16 - Further it is mentioned in Ezra, Ch. No.2 Verse No.64 that… ‘The total congregation, if you add up… if you
add up, it comes to 42,360.’ And if you read in Nehemiah, Ch. No.7, Verse No.66, there also the total is the same 42,360. But
if you add up all these verses - which I had to do my homework - this is the list of Ezra… this is the list of Nehemiah. Ezra
Ch. No 2, Nehemiah Ch. No 7 - If you add up - I had to do my homework…if you add up, Ezra Ch. No. 2 - It does not come to
42,360 - it comes to 29,818. And if you add up Nehemiah, Ch. No. 7, even then it does not come to 42,360 - It comes to
31,089. The author of the Bible, presumed to be ‘Almighty God’, does not know simple addition. If you give this problem,
even to a person who has passed elementary school, he will be able to get the right answer. If you add up all the 60 Verses,
it is so easy. Almighty God did not know adding – Nauzubillah… if we presume, that this is the word of God.
Point No. 17 - Further, if we read, in Ezra Ch. No. 2, Verse No. 65, it says…There were 200 singing men and women -
Nehemiah Ch. No. 7, Verse No. 67…‘There were 245 singing men and women.’ Were they 200 - or were they 245 singing
men and women? Context is the same - A mathematical contradiction.
Point No. 18 - It is mentioned in the 2nd Kings, Ch. No 24, Verse No 8, that…‘Jehoiachin was 18 years old, when he began to
reign Jerusalem, and he reigned for 3 months and 10 days. 2 nd Chronicles, Ch. No 36, Verse No 9, says that…‘Jehoiachin
was 8 years old when he began to reign and he reigned for 3 months, 10 days. Was Jehoiachin 18 years when he began to
reign, or was he 8 years old?
Point No. 19 - Did he reign for 3 months, or did he reign for 3 months 10 days?
Point No. 20 - Further, it is mentioned in the 1 st Kings, Ch. No 7, Verse No 26, that…‘In Solomon’s temple, in his molten sea,
he had 2000 baths. In 2nd Chronicles, Ch. No 4, Verse No 5, he had 3000 baths. Did he have 2000 baths or did he have 3000
baths? – That, I leave it upon Dr. William Campbell to decide which is correct. There is a clear-cut mathematical
contradiction.
Point No. 21 - Furthermore. it is mentioned in the First Kings, Ch. No. 15, Verse No. 33, that… ‘Basha, he died in the 26th
year of reign of Asa.’ And 2 nd Chronicles Ch. No 16, Verse No 1, says that…‘Basha invaded Judah in the 36th years of the
reign of Asa.’ How can Basha invade 10 years after his death? - It is unscientific.
( Point No. 22 - Almighty God - He said, “I put up a rainbow in the sky, as a promise to the human kind, never to submerge
the world again by water”.)
To make it easier for Dr. William Campbell, to answer the points I have raised, I will just mention them in brief .
The points that I mentioned :
The first point was that -‘The creation of the Earth and the Heaven - the universe was in six, 24-hour days.
Point No. 2 - Light was then before the source of light.
Point No. 3 - Day came into existence before creation of Earth.
Point No. 4 - Earth came into existence before Sun.
Point No. 5 - Vegetation came into existence, before sunlight
Point No. 6 - Light of the Moon is its own light.
Point No. 7 - The earth - Will it perish or will it abide forever?
Point No. 8 - The heavens have got pillars.
Point No. 9 - The earth has got pillars.
Point No. 10 - God said… ‘You can have all plants and all vegetation, including the poisonous plants?’
Point No. 11 - The scientific test the falsification test, of Mark, Ch. No. 16, Verse No. 17 and 18.
Point No. 13 - Using blood to disinfect the house, against plague of leprosy.
Point No. 12 - A woman remains unclean for double the period, if she gives birth to a daughter, as compared to a son.
Point No. 14 – How do you find out the bitter water test for adultery?
Point No. 15 - Eighteen different contradictions in less than 60 Verses of Ezra, Ch. 2, and Nehemiah, Ch. 7. I did not count
them as 18 different - I counted them only as one.
Point No. 16 - The total is different is both the chapters.
Point No. 17 - Are there 200 singing men and women, or are there 245 singing men and women?
Point No. 18 - Was Jehoiachin 18 years old, or was he 8 years old when he began to reign?
Point No. 19 - Did he reign for 3 months, or 3 months 10 days.
Point No. 20 - Did Solomon have 3000 baths, or 2000 baths?
Point No. 21 - Is that Basha, how could he invade Judah, 10 years after his death?
Point No. 22 is - Almighty God - He said, “I put up a rainbow in the sky, as a promise to the human kind, never to submerge
the world again by water”.

Op,After all these facts and figures,these gullible christians would come tear you apart and call you out because they still got their defense mechanism which is the bible,they would never THINK/REASON,that's the most annoying part!!!!

@ AROONSON THAT IS THE FACT THEY DONT LISTEN TO THE TRUTH THEY WILL COME HERE NOT TO PROVE ME WRONG BUT TO ABUSE MAY ALLAH NOT LEAD US ASTRAY

They'll come here with their circular mentality and say "the bible is the word of God because the bible say's it is the word of God"

Abrahamweb: They'll come here with their circular mentality and say "the bible is the word of God because the bible say's it is the word of God"

LOLZ

Instead of U̶̲̥̅̊ to concentrate on how we can live together in peace despite our differences, you are here wasting your time comparing the differences btw two books that have been in existence for many centuries. Just know dis; religion will take us no where because it is man's creation. It wasn't God's original plan for any man to bow down to him but man's disobedience brought him on his knees. Thesame Allah that created the Muslims also created the Christians. Why bother about anoda man's religion so far he doesn't stop U̶̲̥̅̊ from worshipping your God. Live and let others live..this world is too big to contain all of us without any problem. Who is mortal man to say he's fighting for God?! If God is aggrieved he'll fight for himself...i'm not here to castigate U̶̲̥̅̊. Preach your religion to others but don't force or condemn them because in so doing U̶̲̥̅̊ pass judgment upon yourself. Leave condemnation to God the ultimate judge of mankind!
N.B:- whatever religion U̶̲̥̅̊ find yourself practicing is accidental...U̶̲̥̅̊ can as well have been born in a christian home. Or did U̶̲̥̅̊ choose your religion from heaven b4 U̶̲̥̅̊ were born? Be careful of what U̶̲̥̅̊ say about others or their religion so as not to anger Allah; the creator of all mankind!

funshint: Instead of U̶̲̥̅̊ to concentrate on how we can live together in peace despite our differences, you are here wasting your time comparing the differences btw two books that have been in existence for many centuries. Just know dis; religion will take us no where because it is man's creation. It wasn't God's original plan for any man to bow down to him but man's disobedience brought him on his knees. Thesame Allah that created the Muslims also created the Christians. Why bother about anoda man's religion so far he doesn't stop U̶̲̥̅̊ from worshipping your God. Live and let others live..this world is too big to contain all of us without any problem. Who is mortal man to say he's fighting for God?! If God is aggrieved he'll fight for himself...i'm not here to castigate U̶̲̥̅̊. Preach your religion to others but don't force or condemn them because in so doing U̶̲̥̅̊ pass judgment upon yourself. Leave condemnation to God the ultimate judge of mankind!
N.B:- whatever religion U̶̲̥̅̊ find yourself practicing is accidental...U̶̲̥̅̊ can as well have been born in a christian home. Or did U̶̲̥̅̊ choose your religion from heaven b4 U̶̲̥̅̊ were born? Be careful of what U̶̲̥̅̊ say about others or their religion so as not to anger Allah; the creator of all mankind!

............nice one sir but the christians are not helping the matter they try to deface islam by saying what they dont have knowledge about......so with this we just came to the conclusion that they never check their book before ausing others

Nonsense

Abdulsalam20: @ AROONSON THAT IS THE FACT THEY DONT LISTEN TO THE TRUTH THEY WILL COME HERE NOT TO PROVE ME WRONG BUT TO ABUSE MAY ALLAH NOT LEAD US ASTRAY

Quran also contradicts science. .. check faith freedom.com or wiki islam... Quran is a plagiarized version of bible.... religion sucks big time

abdulwastecx:

Quran also contradicts science. .. check faith freedom.com or wiki islam... Quran is a plagiarized version of bible.... religion sucks big time

I HAVE READ MOST OF THEM BEFFORE IF U CANTAKE YOUR TIME TO READ IT U WILL SEE THAT IT IS MEANINGLESS.........NO SIENTIST TOAC WHAT THEY SAID UP AND EVEN THE POST I POSTED IS A DEBATE ETWEEN DR ZAKR NAIK AND A CHRISTIAN PHYSICIAN HE NEVER MAKE ANY ACCUSATION ON SCIENCE AND ISLAM ECAUSE HE KNOWS THE TRUTH TO GET THE IVIDEO GOTO GOOGLE AND TYPE BIBLE AND SCIENCE BY DR ZAKR NAIK

I can't stop laughing at the OP, this shows how Muslims strictly follow the teaching of Muhammad "using lie to achieve their aims".
The reason I said this is because if you call this a DEBATE and you went ahead ONLY to provide the challenge QUESTIONS without providing the other part RESPOND to all these, shows how dubious you are.

I challenge you "if you can" to provide in detail the RESPOND of Dr. William Campbell in this debate then we'll know how genuine Dr. Zakir's points are.

*Remember all the challenge Dr. Zakir raised can also be used again Islam.

Emusan: I can't stop laughing at the OP, this shows how Muslims strictly follow the teaching of Muhammad "using lie to achieve their aims".
The reason I said this is because if you call this a DEBATE and you went ahead ONLY to provide the challenge QUESTIONS without providing the other part RESPOND to all these, shows how dubious you are.

I challenge you "if you can" to provide in detail the RESPOND of Dr. William Campbell in this debate then we'll know how genuine Dr. Zakir's points are.

*Remember all the challenge Dr. Zakir raised can also be used again Islam.

I HAVE TOLD U WHERE U CAN GET IT THE VIDEO IS MORE THAN 2HR I TRIED TOGET THE PDF BUT IT IS NT AVAILABLE.............U CAN DOWNLOAD THE VIDEO TOLISTEN TO IT UR SELF

Emusan: I can't stop laughing at the OP, this shows how Muslims strictly follow the teaching of Muhammad "using lie to achieve their aims".
The reason I said this is because if you call this a DEBATE and you went ahead ONLY to provide the challenge QUESTIONS without providing the other part RESPOND to all these, shows how dubious you are.

I challenge you "if you can" to provide in detail the RESPOND of Dr. William Campbell in this debate then we'll know how genuine Dr. Zakir's points are.

*Remember all the challenge Dr. Zakir raised can also be used again Islam.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?rl=yes&feature=related&v=k-og6PWLTNQ&gl=NG&hl=en&client=mv-google

CLICK ON THIS LINK TO DOWNLOAD AUDIOS
www.dawahusa.com/audio/zakirnaik.shtml

CLICK ON THIS LINK AND SEE THE RESPONE WITH ALI SUNNA ALLEGATION AND ISLAMIC SCHOLAR RESPONSE I CANT POST IT DIRECTLY COZ THE DOCUMENT IS HUGE www.answering-christianity.com/yahya_ahmed/dr_zakir_naik_rebuttal.htm

Abdulsalam20: I HAVE TOLD U WHERE U CAN GET IT THE VIDEO IS MORE THAN 2HR

Despite that is more than 2hrs YET could get your OWN perverted master out of it BUT to get the rebuttal of Dr. Campbell is long
I TRIED TOGET THE PDF BUT IT IS NT AVAILABLE.............U CAN DOWNLOAD THE VIDEO TOLISTEN TO IT UR SELF[/quote]

Despite that is more than 2hrs YET could get your OWN perverted master out of it BUT to get the rebuttal of Dr. Campbell is long >

I TRIED TOGET THE PDF BUT IT IS NT AVAILABLE.............U CAN DOWNLOAD THE VIDEO TOLISTEN TO IT UR SELF

Don't worry I challenge you but you couldn't meet up with my challenge so it's left for you to judge yourself.

This is called a DEBATE Dr. Zakir provided his own challenge WHAT IS THE RESPOND of Dr. Campbell? simple.

Or if I tell you that "Teacher is better than Doctor" and I presented my point(s) supporting Teacher and someone copied ONLY my point(s)/presentation, CAN YOU AS A PERSON HOLD TO MY POINT ONLY AND AGREE THAT TRULY TEACHER IS BETTER THAN DOCTOR?

So I'm waiting for Campbell's RESPOND to this DEBATE from you.

Abdulsalam20: http://m.youtube.com/watch?rl=yes&feature=related&v=k-og6PWLTNQ&gl=NG&hl=en&client=mv-google

Copy and paste Campbell's words like you did to Zakir and stop your babbling.

If you want many link to Christian-Islam debate I can give you BUT if you want to do enough justice to your THREAD give in detail the respond of Campbell in this debate.

It's quite funny how you only put up the Questions from one party and never gave the Replies by the other party...
Well I'm not surprised... The reasons for you action is not far fetched...

Emusan:

Despite that is more than 2hrs YET could get your OWN perverted master out of it BUT to get the rebuttal of Dr. Campbell is long
I TRIED TOGET THE PDF BUT IT IS NT AVAILABLE.............U CAN DOWNLOAD THE VIDEO TOLISTEN TO IT UR SELF

Despite that is more than 2hrs YET could get your OWN perverted master out of it BUT to get the rebuttal of Dr. Campbell is long >

I TRIED TOGET THE PDF BUT IT IS NT AVAILABLE.............U CAN DOWNLOAD THE VIDEO TOLISTEN TO IT UR SELF

Don't worry I challenge you but you couldn't meet up with my challenge so it's left for you to judge yourself.

This is called a DEBATE Dr. Zakir provided his own challenge WHAT IS THE RESPOND of Dr. Campbell? simple.

Or if I tell you that "Teacher is better than Doctor" and I presented my point(s) supporting Teacher and someone copied ONLY my point(s)/presentation, CAN YOU AS A PERSON HOLD TO MY POINT ONLY AND AGREE THAT TRULY TEACHER IS BETTER THAN DOCTOR?

So I'm waiting for Campbell's RESPOND to this DEBATE from you.

THE MAIN REASON WHY CAMPBELL STATEMENT IS HARD TO FIND ON NET IS BECAUSE PEOPLE KNOW THAT CAMPBELL PERFORM WOEFULLY EVEN ON CHRISTIAMNS SITE ITS NT THERE BUT ALI SINA LATER COMMENTED ON THE VIDEO THAT DR ZAKR NAIK IS A MAGICIAN AND ALI TRIED TO DEFEND THE CHRISTIAN
BUT EVERY TYN HAS BEEN RESPONDED TO

Does Dr.Zakir Naik Really Fool the
audience?
On the very front page of Ali Sina’s site. Ali Sina has
written a response to Dr.Zakir Naik's presentation in his
debate with Dr.William Campbell. He says that Dr.Zakir
Naik is a magician and he fools his audience with words.
He calls him a Showman. You can find his response here
http://www.faithfreedom.org/debates/
NaikCampbellintro.htm#content
The Reason arises why does he call him a Showman and a
magician? The reason is obvious. Dr.Zakir Naik
Alhumdulillah with the grace of Allah (SWT) winning over
people's hearts.. He has delivered more than a thousand
public talks worldwide. He has Alhumdulillah started his
new 24 hour Satellite channel "Peace TV". This Channel
Promotes the True Picture of Islam. Ali Sina does not like
that.
Here I will be exposing Ali Sina. He not only is unscholarly
in his approach but he even lacks ethical values. Any
unbiased person who sees this picture of Dr.Zakir Naik
modified by Ali Sina and his clowns will realize that Ali
Sina is a loony.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/debates/
NaikCampbellintro.htm
Before I respond to the points raised by him. I would like
to make few points clear.
1. If Ali Sina Writes a response to Dr.Zakir Naik that
doesn't mean that Dr.Naik is fooling his audience. If I use
this logic than it also means that Dr.William Campbell was
also fooling his audience when he said falsehood about
Islam. It also means that Ali Sina is also fooling his readers
because many Muslims including Brother Umar on this site
has responded to false charges of Ali Sina.
http://www.answering-christianity.com/umar/
true_face_of_ali_sina_2.htm
2. It is Dr.William Campbell who actually initiated the
debate. Dr.Zakir Naik doesn't go around asking people to
have a public debate with him. Dr.Campbell wrote a book
against the Quran. Dr.Naik refuted all the points of
Dr.Campbell and pointed out scientific errors and
contradictions in the bible. Ali Sina accuses Dr.Zakir of
attacking the bible but doesn't say anything about
Dr.Campbell who actually initiated the debate.
3. The Translations are human handi-work and are bound
to contain errors. No Translation per se is error free. The
Translator may not have in-depth knowledge of Science
therefore it is highly possible that he makes an error in
translating the scientific statements mentioned in the
Quran.
Dr.Maurice Bucaille writes:
"Why do errors in translation exist? They may be
explained by the fact that modern translators often take
up, rather uncritically , the interpretations given by older
commentators. In their day, the latter had an excuse for
having given an inappropriate definition to an Arabic
word containing several possible meanings; they could not
possibly have understood the real sense the word or
phrase which has only become clear in the present day
thanks to scientific knowledge. In Other words, the
problem is raised of the necessary revision of translations
and commentaries. It was possible to do this at a certain
period in the past, but nowadays we have knowledge
that enables us to render their true sense "
(The Bible, The Quran, And The Science pg 118-119)
I'll mainly be touching the points which he raised on the
Quran. I wont be dealing with each and every small point
which is irrelevant. It was actually Dr.William Campbell
who was supposed to reply to these points. Therefore, He
should even thank me for even taking out my time.
Big Bang in the Quran?
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) As far as Qur’an and modern Science is
concerned, in the field of ‘Astronomy’, the Scientists, the
Astronomers, a few decades earlier, they described, how
the universe came into existence - They call it the ‘Big
Bang’. And they said… ‘Initially there was one primary
nebula, which later on it separated with a Big Bang, which
gave rise to Galaxies, Stars, Sun and the Earth, we live in.’
This information is given in a nutshell in the Glorious
Qur’an , in Surah Ambiya, Ch. 21, Verse No. 30, which
says…. (Arabic).... Do not the unbelievers see…? ….
(Arabic)…. ‘That the heavens and the earth were joined
together, and we clove them asunder?’ Imagine this
information which we came to know recently, the Qur’an
mentions 14 hundred years ago.
(Ali Sina) In his fervor to make the Quran look scientific
Dr. Naik overlooks the fact that the theory of Big Bang
precludes the concept of creation. If Big Bang is true then
the story of the creation and Adam and Eve must be false
and vice versa. This is elemental.
21:30 , ‘The heavens and the earth were joined together,
and we clove them asunder’
This is not an allusion to the Big Bang. It is the rehashing
of the Genesis:
6 And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the
waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the
expanse and separated the water under the expanse from
the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse
"sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the
second day. Gen 1: 6-9
So if this is a miracle, the credit should go to the Bible and
not to the Quran. This fable, like many others, is borrowed
from the Bible.
My Response:
Ali Sina here claims that the Quran is copied from the
Bible. The same nonsense, which Christians keep
repeating. Since he has accused Dr.Zakir Naik. I can do no
better than let Dr.Zakir Naik reply to it.
http://www.irf.net/irf/dtp/dawah_tech/t18/t18a/pg1.htm .
Ali Sina Writes:
21:30 presents also another problem. It contradicts with
the verse 41.11
"Moreover He comprehended in His design the sky, and it
had been (as) smoke: He said to it and to the earth: "Come
ye together, willingly or unwillingly." They said: "We do
come (together), in willing obedience."
So which story is the right tale of the creation? Were the
heaven and the earth joined together and Allah clove them
asunder or were they apart and Allah told them to come
together?
My Response.
In the verse 41.11 Allah (SWT) is not talking about the
physical calling of heavens and earth together. He is
talking about coming into existence. Quran is in complete
compability with modern science. These verses have other
scientific points in it as well. But since I am only
responding to his points I wont go into details right now.

Ali Sina Writes:
Of course both are false. The earth is inside the sky and
part of it. They can neither come together nor
separate. Here we have two version that contradict each
other and both are scientifically wrong.
My Response :
As I explained above none of the two is wrong. Dr.Zakir
Naik explains
“The creation of the universe is explained by
astrophysicists in a widely accepted phenomenon,
popularly known as the 'Big Bang'. It is supported by
observational and experimental data gathered by
astronomers and astrophysicists for decades. According to
the 'Big Bang', the whole universe was initially one big
mass (Primary Nebula). Then there was a 'Big
Bang' (Secondary Separation) which resulted in the
formation of Galaxies. These then divided to form stars,
planets, the sun, the moon, etc. The origin of the universe
was unique and the probability of it occurring by 'chance'
is zero."
Does the Quran say the Sun and the Moon Revolve Around
Their Own Axis?
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) When I was in school, I had learned that the
Sun in respect to the Earth - it was stationary - the Earth
and the Moon, they rotated about in axis, but the sun was
stationary. But when I read a Verse of the Qur’an saying, in
Surah Al–Ambiya, Ch. . 21 Verse No. 33, it says…. (Arabic).
… ‘It is Allah who has created the night and the day.’….
(Arabic)…. The sun and the moon…. (Arabic)…. Each one
traveling in an orbit with its own motion. Now
Alhamdulillah, modern science has confirmed the Qur’an ic
statement. The Arabic word used in the Qur’an is
‘Yasbahoon’ , which describes the motion of a moving body.
When it refers to a celestial body, it means it is rotating
about its own axis. So Qur’an says the sun and the Moon,
they revolve as well as rotate about their own axis. Today
we have come to know that the Sun takes approximately
25 days to complete one rotation.
(Ali Sina) Dr. Naikr claims that the verse 21:33 which says
the sun and the moon follow their orbits means they
rotate around their axis because the word íóÓúÈóÍõæäó
ysbahun means rotating around its own axis. This is simply
not true. Dr. Naik is fabricating evidence and twisting the
meaning of the words. The word here implies that the Sun
and the Moon rotate in circle, i.e. around the Earth and
not around their own axis. This is what Muhammad
observed and this is what he said. He stated what was
obvious to him and to everyone else. See how this word is
translated.
Pickthall They float, each in an orbit.
Yusuf
Ali
swim along, each in its rounded course.
Hilali-
Khan
each in an orbit floating.
Shakir all (orbs) travel along swiftly in their
celestial spheres.
Sher Ali each gliding along smoothly in its orbit.
Khalifa each floating in its own orbit.
Arberry each swimming in a sky.
Palmer each floating in a sky.
Rodwell each moving swiftly in its sphere.
Sale [the celestial bodies] move swiftly, [each] in
[its respective] orb.
As one can see, Dr. Naik is in error. By bundling the Moon
and the Sun together, it is clear that Muhammad thought
they are alike with one being brighter than the other.
Attempts such as this, to twist the apparent meaning of the
words reveal the desperation of Muslims to find miracles
and science in the absurdities of the Quran and hide its
errors. Why none of these so called miracles attributed to
Muhammad are in clear language? Why Allah did not say
the Earth is round and it is rotating around the Sun and
the Moon is rotating around the Earth? Simple and clear!
In none of the so called Quranic miracles you find clarity.
Then again, if the Quran is full of science why the Islamic
countries are most wretched? Muslim's response to this is
that Muslims do not practice Islam, that is why. But how is
it that the Kafir countries that do not practice Islam at all
are better than Muslim countries that practice it a little?
Why virtually all the kafir countries are more advanced
than virtually all the Islamic countries? The more Islamic
a country gets the more backward, barbaric and poor it
becomes. Is there in this a lesson for us all?
My Response:
As I explained in the beginning that translations are
human handy-work and they are done by people who may
not be having great knowledge of science. And even you if
you read the last translation by Sale it says the same thing
what Dr.Zakir Naik explained. It reads " [the celestial
bodies] move swiftly, [each] in [its respective] orb.
" see the different meanings of the word "orb"
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/orb
Muslims today have gotten backward because we have
deviated away from the teachings of Islam. When we
Muslims were close to the Quran we were on the top of the
world. Did Ali Sina forget the discoveries done by Muslim
scientists The discoveries done by Western Scientists
are only in last few centuries. Western scientists rehashed
many of the discoveries of Muslim Scientists. Did he forget
the Muslims scientists who did brilliant discoveries about
800-1000 years ago?? Did he forget great scientists like
Jabbir Ibn Hayyan, Ali Ibn Sina (Avicenna), Muhammad
Zakaria Razi etc. For more detail, refer to this.
http://www.ummah.net/history/scholars/index.html
Ali Sina Writes:
A quick calculation reveals that the likelihood that a Jew
wins the Noble Prize is 2088 times higher than a Muslim
winning it. If all the science is in the Quran why all the
Muslims are so miserable?
My Response:
As I explained above. It is because we have deviated away
from the word of Allah (SWT). Ali Sina also considers Bible
unscientific. But we have many Christian scientists.
Therefore, Religion has nothing to do with discoveries of
science. The followers of many other religions like
Hinduism, Buddhism etc. live in third world countries.
They have not done many discoveries either. But Ali Sina
doesn't highlight them. He is only concerned about
targeting the Muslims.
Does the Quran say the Universe is Expanding?
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) It was Edvin Hubbel who discovered that the
universe is expanding. The Qur’an says in Surah Dhariyat,
Ch. 51, Verse No. 47, that…‘We have created the
expanding universe’ - The vastness of space. The Arabic
word ‘Mohsiana ’ refers to ‘vastness’ – ‘the expanding
universe.’
Regarding the topics on Astronomy, which Dr. William
Campbell touched, I will deal in the rebuttal, InshaAllah.
(Ali Sina) Dr. Naik claims that the verse 51:47 talks about
the expanding universe. This is not so. Muhammad is
simply saying that the universe is vast and not that it is
expanding. This verse reads:
Arabic…
See how this is translated:
YUSUFALI: With power and skill did We construct the
Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of pace.
PICKTHAL: We have built the heaven with might, and We it is
Who make the vast extent (thereof).
SHAKIR: And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and
most surely We are the makers of things ample.
The fact that the universe is vast is prosaic and obvious.
There is no mention of expanding universe in this verse.
Any illiterate man can look at the sky and see it is vast. To
the ancient people even the Earth looked vast. To us it
looks very small.
My Response:
Ali Sina previously quoted atleast 7-8 translations for
Quran 21:33. Now he only quoted three. Why?? The
reason is because if he had quoted more he would have
been proved to be a liar. Let’s read other translations of
the verse of the Quran 51:47
Dr. Munir Munshey : " With Our power and prowess, We
brought into being the universe. And indeed, We expand it
(steadily)!"
Muhammad Al-Hilali & Muhsin Khan: "With power did We
construct the heaven. Verily, we are Able to extend the
vastness of space thereof."
Arberry: " And heaven -- We built it with might, and We
extend it wide."
Khalifa : "We constructed the sky with our hands, and we
will continue to expand it."
And if you read the translation by Muhammad Asad, it
uses the same words which Dr.Zakir Naik used "Expanding
Universe". The verse reads
Muhammad Asad : "It is we who have built the universe
with [our creative] power; and, verily, it is we who are
steadily expanding it."
"we are expanding it" is the translation of the plural
present participle musi'una and of the verb ausa'a
meaning "to make wider, more spacious, to extend, to
expand"
Water Cycle in the Quran?
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) In the field of ‘Water cycle’ that Dr. William
Campbell pointed out, certain things. The Qur’an describes
the water cycle in great detail. And Dr. William Campbell
mentioned 4 stages. In his book he mentions 4 (a) and (b)
- the last one he did not mention in the slide - I don’t know
why? It says... ‘The Driplinition’…‘The Water table.’ He
missed out here - Maybe because it was not mentioned in
the Bible . He said there is not a single Verse in the Qur’an ,
which speaks about ‘evaporation.’ Qur’an says in Surah Al-
Tariq, Ch. No. 86, Verse No. 11, that….(Arabic)…. ‘By the
capacity of the heavens to return.’ And almost all the
commentaries of the Qur’an - they said, that this Verse of
Surah Tariq, Ch. No. 86, Verse No. 11, refers to the
capacity of the heavens to return back rain - meaning
‘Evaporation.’
(Ali Sina) I don’t know which commentator said such a
thing but if anyone has, he is mistaken. Let us read the
first part of this Sura:
My Response :
He is insinuating that only he (Ali Sina) knows the Quran
whereas any commentator who says so is mistaken.
Ali Sina continues :
Let us read the first part of this Sura:
086.001 By the Sky and the Night-Visitant (therein);-
086.002 And what will explain to thee what the Night-
Visitant is?-
086.003 (It is) the Star of piercing brightness;-
086.004 There is no soul but has a protector over it.
086.005 Now let man but think from what he is created!
086.006 He is created from a drop emitted-
086.007 Proceeding from between the backbone and the
ribs:
086.008 Surely (Allah) is able to bring him back (to life)!
086.004 There is no soul but has a protector over it.
086.005 Now let man but think from what he is created!
086.006 He is created from a drop emitted-
086.007 Proceeding from between the backbone and the
ribs:
086.008 Surely (Allah) is able to bring him back (to life)!
086.009 The Day that (all) things secret will be tested,
086.010 (Man) will have no power, and no helper.
086.011 By the Firmament which returns (in its round),
The entire Sura is gibberish. It just makes so sense. You
can hardly find any text as obtuse as this.
My Response :
Ali Sina considers the Surah to be gibberish. To infidels
the whole Quran may sound gibberish. And Ali Sina is one
of them. Therefore, it does not really matter to us if this
sounds gibberish to him. I won’t be touching to all six of
his so called "errors" in the Quran. I'll just deal with the
first and the last one.
"1) It appears that Muhammad is saying that each person
has a star that protects him. This is fairytale fit for
children.
Where is the verse saying that star protects the man?? !!
The first 3 verses of the Surah are speaking of something
different whereas the verse 4 is speaking about something
different. If Ali Sina is dumb and cannot even understand
plain English that does not mean Quran is wrong. Lets now
come to the main topic of it which Dr.Naik touched.
"By the Firmament which returns (in its round)" (Quran
86:11)"
Ali Sina then goes on to say there are six “errors” in this
Surah. I’ll just be dealing with the last one here which is
relevant to the topic.
Ali Sina Writes:
6) Then he swears “by the Firmament which returns (in its
round)”. Firmament is the stars, the sun and the moon, not
vapor and rain. Muhammad saw that every night the stars
are coming back and every day the Sun is returning. These
heavenly objects were known as the firmament. This verse
has nothing to do with evaporation and rain. Please pay
attention how often Dr. Naik twists the meanings of the
words to make his point prevail. The word used is ' sama'.
It means sky/heaven and it can also be interpreted as
firmament but it can't be translated as rain.
My Response:
As Ali Sina here rightly says that "sama" means heaven/
sky. I want to know where did Dr.Zakir naik translate it as
"rain"? He never did so. Here are the words of Dr.Naik
"By the capacity of the heavens to return.’ And almost all
the commentaries of the Qur’an - they said, that this Verse
of Surah Tariq, Ch. No. 86, Verse No. 11, refers to the
capacity of the heavens to return back rain - meaning
‘Evaporation.’ "
Can anyone here see Dr.Naik translating "sama" as
"rain" This is another terrible lie by Ali Sina. See how
he is trying to deceive his reader. Dr.Naik simply
explained what it is referring to

Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Dr. William Campbell who knows Arabic, may
say…‘Why did not Allah Subhanawa Taala specifically
mention….(Arabic) …. Meaning… ‘The capacity of the
heavens to return back rain.’ Why did not Allah mention
specifically? Now we have came to know why did not Allah
do that, in His Divine wisdom. Because today we have
came to know that besides - the Ozonosphere… the layer
above the earth - Besides returning back rain, it even
returns back other beneficial matter and energy of the
Earth, which is required by the human beings. It does not
only return back rain - Today we have come to know, it
even returns back waves of Telecommunication, of
Television, of Radio, by which we can see TV, we can
communicate, we can hear the radio. And besides that, it
even returns back the harmful rays of the outer space,
back on the other side, and absorbs. For example the sun
light… the ultraviolet rays of the Sun light is absorbed by
the Ionosphere. If this was not done, life on the Earth
would have ceased to exist. So Allah Subhanawataala is far
superior and for more accurate, when He says…. (Arabic)
…. By the capacity of the Heaven to return.’ And the
remaining things as he mentioned is there in the Qur’an -
You can refer to my Videocassette. The Qur’an describes
the ‘Water cycle’ in great detail.
(Ali Sina) Wow! What a great logic. Why the Quran does
not talk about the stage of evaporation? …Because
Ozonosphere returns other beneficial matters such as
radio waves too. That is why!
Instead of answering the question, Dr. Naik tries to
distract his audience by talking about red herring and by
introducing non sequitor arguments.
But wait a minute! Didn't Dr. Naik say that "the Firmament
which returns " is about the capacity of heavens to return
back rain? Obviously Dr. Naik could not even convince
himself. After assuring us that "almost all the
commentaries of the Qur’an - they said, that this Verse of
Surah Tariq, Ch. No. 86, Verse No. 11, refers to the
capacity of the heavens to return back rain - meaning
‘Evaporation’", he goes on to give us the reason why Allah
did not mention this stage in the Quran. Come on Doctor!
Don't make this too easy for me.
My Response:
Quran mentions the stage of evaporation in this verse. But
since Quran is superior to science. It goes beyond that. If
the Quran mentioned specifically then it would only mean
returning of rain. Rain is not the only thing which the
ozonosphere returns. Quran is more scientific!! For more
on the returning sky
http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/scientific_22.html
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Regarding what he said about the Bible , he
showed stage 1 and stage 3 in the first slide, and in the
second stage 1, 3, and then 2. ‘That the rain water is taken
up’… he says… ‘and then the rain water comes down on
the Earth.’ This is the philosophy of Phasofmillitas, in 7th
century BC. He thought that the spray of the ocean was
picked up by the wind, and send to the interior as rain.
There is no cloud mentioned there. In the second
quotation Dr. William Campbell gave - First is, according to
him, ‘evaporation’ which we agree. We don’t mind having
the concordance approach with the Bible . ‘…Then rain falls
down, and then are the clouds formed.’ - That is not the
complete water cycle. Alhamdulillah, the Qur’an describes
the water cycle in great detail, in several places. How does
the water rise, evaporates, forms into clouds - the clouds
join together, they stalk up, there is thunder and lightning,
water comes down, the clouds move into the interior, they
fall down as rain, and the evaporation of the water table
and Alhamdulillah in great detail. The Qur’an speaks about
the water cycle in great detail, in several places. In Surah
Nur, Ch. No. 24, Verse No. 43, in Surah Rum, Ch. No. 30,
Verse 48, in Surah Al-Zumar, Ch. 39, Verse 21, in Surah
Muminun, Ch. 23, Verse 18, in Surah Rum Ch. No. 30,
Verse No. 24, in Surah Al-Hijr, Ch. 15, Verse No. 22, in
Surah Araf Ch. No. 7, Verse No. 57, in Surah Rad, Ch. No.
13, Verse No. 17, in Surah Furqan, Ch. 25, Verse No. 48 and
49, in Surah Fatir, Ch. No. 35, Verse No. 9, in Surah Yasin,
Ch. 36, Verse No. 34, in Surah Jathiya, Ch. 45, Verse No. 5,
in Surah Qaf, Ch. No. 50, Verse No. 9, in Surah Al-Waqiah,
Ch. No. 56, Verse No. 68 and 70, in several places, Surah
Al-Mulk,Ch. 67, Verse No. 30, the Glorious Qur’an speaks
about the ‘Water cycle’, in great detail.
(Ali Sina) Here is where Dr. Naik outperformed himself.
His Muslim audience became ecstatic and started
applauding and cheering as if he was a pop singer
performing their favorite number. He said all those verses
from memory, like pulling one rabbit after another out his
had. Impressive indeed. Let us quote these verses and see
if there is anything miraculous in them. While you are
reading, note how often Muhammad forgets that the
Quran is supposed to be the word of Allah and Allah
should not refer to himself in third person.
My Response:
Dr.Zakir Naik did not have enough time to explain them.
Therefore, to cut short he only gave references. Muslim
audience had every right to be ecstatic because Dr.Zakir
Naik was convincingly refuting the falsehood promoted by
Dr.William Campbell. The answer to the shift from first to
third person etc. is here
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Grammar/
robinson.html
Ali Sina then goes on to quote all the verses and says that it
is only observable phenomenon. He doesn't realize that
Quran is 1400 years old. Today it seems to be observable
phenomenon to us because all the data on the subject is
with us. Water Cycle seems to be an observable
phenomenon.
In the words of Ali Sina "What the Quran describes has
been observable by any primitive man since eons."
If Water Cycle is an observable phenomenon then why is it
considered only a recent discovery of about 500-600 years
old? Why isn't it considered simply to be an observable
phenomenon? Why is taught to children in school??
Dr.Maurice Bucaille knew that there would be people like
Ali Sina who will think that water cycle is merely an
observable phenomenon. Moreover, what the Quran
mentions is not simply an observable phenomenon. I'll just
provide one example here.
" And He sends down from the sky mountain masses (of
clouds) wherein is hail:" (Quran 24:43)
Now if you are traveling by an aeroplane and when the
aeroplane goes above the clouds. One can see that clouds
appear like mountain masses. I myself have witnessed it.
On which aeroplane did Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) go to
check this??
How come Ali Sina missed out this verse?
“And We send the fecundating winds, then cause the rain
to descend from the sky, therewith providing you with
water (in abundance), though ye are not the guardians of
its stores.” (15:22)
Dr.Maurice Bucaille writes:
"When the verses of Quran concerning the role of water in
man's existence are read in succession today, they all
appear to us to express ideas that are quite obvious. The
reason for this is simple: in our day and age, we all, to a
lesser or greater extent, know about the water cycle in
nature.
If However , we consider the various concepts the ancients
had on this subject, it becomes clear that the data in the
Quran do not embody the mythical concepts current at the
time of the Revelation which had been developed more
according to philosophical speculation than observed
phenomenon. Although it was empirically possible to
acquire on a modest scale, the useful practical knowledge
necessary for the improvement of the irrigation, the
concepts held on the water cycle in general would hardly
be acceptable today."
Note: Ali Sina also accuses Dr.Maurice Bucaille and
Professor Keith Moore of fooling the people. I'll come to
that later.
Do Mountains Stabilize the Earth
Dr.Zakir Naik in his talk provided the source. He said that
Dr.Frank Press said that mountains give stability to the
earth and he asked Dr.William Campbell to prove on the
contrary. Get any documented proof which says on the
contrary.
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) I have not come across a single Geological book,
and I challenge Dr. William Campbell to produce a single
Geological book - Not his personal correspondence with
the Geologist. That does not carry weight. His personal
correspondence with Dr. Keith Moore …. Documented
proof. And if you read the book ‘The Earth’ which is
referred by almost all the universities, in the field of
Geology, one of its authors by the name of Dr Frank Press,
who was the advisor to the former president of USA,
Jimmy Carter, and was the president of the Academy of
Science of USA. He writes in his book that…‘The mountains
are wedge shaped - It has deep roots within. And he says
that…‘The function of the mountain is to stabilize the
earth.’ And the Qur’an says in Surah Ambiya, Ch. No 21,
Verse No. 31, in Surah Luqman, Ch. No. 31 Verse No.10, as
well as in Surah Nahl, Ch. No. 16, Verse No. 15, that…‘We
have made the mountains standing firm on the Earth, lest
it would shake with them and with you.’
(Ali Sina) I tried to contact Dr. Frank Press and wrote to
two sites that had written about him asking to please put
me in touch with him. Neither of them responded. I am
not willing to buy his book Earth that costs $95.95 dollars
just to verify this claim. However I doubt Dr. Press could
have said such an absurd thing. Muslims are good in
twisting things to make them look something else. I believe
Dr. Naik has got this false information form Another
Islamic site islam-guide.com that says: "A book entitled
Earth is a basic reference textbook in many universities
around the world. One of its two authors is Professor
Emeritus Frank Press. He was the Science Advisor to
former US President Jimmy Carter, and for 12 years was
the President of the National Academy of Sciences,
Washington, DC. His book says that mountains have
underlying roots. [ Earth, Press and Siever, p. 435. Also
see Earth Science , Tarbuck and Lutgens, p. 157.] These
roots are deeply embedded in the ground, thus, mountains
have a shape like a peg
My Response:
Does Dr.Frank Press really have time to contact every
Tom,Dick and Harry?? Does he have time to contact people
like Ali Sina who hide behind the internet like cowards? Ali
Sina hides behind the internet, writes, and thinks that he
is a genius.
How can Ali Sina simply accuse someone with mere
assumptions?? He is firstly not willing to buy the book.
Then he is accusing Dr.Naik of copying from this site.
Dr.Naik said the same thing much earlier than this debate.
He said so also in his talk "Quran and Modern Science -
Conflict or conciliation” in 1996 and he had delivered talks
on the same subjects before also. It reads on the site
"A book entitled Earth is a basic reference textbook in
many universities around the world. One of its two
authors is Professor Emeritus Frank Press. He was the
Science Advisor to former US President Jimmy Carter, and
for 12 years was the President of the National Academy of
Sciences, Washington, DC. His book says that mountains
have underlying roots.1 These roots are deeply
embedded in the ground, thus, mountains have a shape
like a peg (see figures 7, 8, and 9)."
When Ali Sina quotes this site. He removed the reference
to the footnotes. The site further provides us with 3
pictures and Ali Sina on it writes:
“These pictures have nothing to do with science. They are
just more Islamic lies. These are taken from The Geological
Concept of Mountains in the Quran a book written by a
Muslims El-Naggar and falsely attributed to Dr.
Press.” Source:
May I know where these people attributed the photos
taken to Dr.Frank Press?? They even provide the source of
it. Here are the 3 sources mentioned on the same site of
pictures 1,2 and 3 respectively.
"Figure 7: Mountains have deep roots under the surface of
the ground. (Earth, Press and Siever, p. 413.)"
"Figure 8: Schematic section. The mountains, like pegs,
have deep roots embedded in the ground. (Anatomy of the
Earth, Cailleux, p. 220.) "
"Figure 9: Another illustration shows how the mountains
are peg-like in shape, due to their deep roots. (Earth
Science, Tarbuck and Lutgens, p. 158.)"
See how Ali Sina lies. He thinks that people will simply
believe him without verifying.
Further, Ali Sina doesn't agree with the verses of the
Quran 16:15,21:31. And he starts giving his scientific
explanation. Wait a minute, Where is the source of all his
wishful explanations?? Dr.Zakir Naik atleast gave the
source. He quoted a non-Muslim scientist Dr.Frank Press,
who has no reason to favour the Quran. Nor did he write
the book to bring a compability between the Quran and
Science.
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) And in reply to the statement…‘That if
mountains prevent earthquakes, how come you find
earthquakes in mountainous regions?’ The reply is, that -
If I say that medical doctors, they prevent the sickness and
disease in a human being, and if someone argues…‘If
doctors prevent the sickness and diseases in a human
being, how come you find more sick people in the
hospitals, where there are more doctors than at home -
where there are no doctors.’
(Ali Sina) What a ridiculous analogy! Patients go to
hospitals AFTER they get sick because they are living and
thinking beings and that is where they can get medical
attention and get better. They do not become sick in
hospitals (unless the hospital is in an Islamic country with
Islamic hygiene). Is Dr. Naik trying to compare
earthquake, a natural phenomenon, to humans? Do the
earthquakes happen first elsewhere and then decide to
conglomerate in mountains? This analogy is utterly
ridiculous; yet Dr. Naik’s Muslim audience became so
elated that they spontaneously cheered and applauded.
One black guy was almost falling off his chair of excessive
laughing. What these people were laughing at? At their
own stupidity? Now the world can see them and laugh at
them. It’s as if the more stupid is a statement, the more
Muslims enjoy it. This reveals the deplorable intellectual
bankruptcy of the wretched Umma.
My Response:
Dr.Zakir Naik clearly explained the verses of the Quran.
He said this just as a joke and to expose the poor reasoning
of Dr.William Campbell. Dr.Zakir Naik explained it very
well. Muslim audience cheered because Islam was being
defended and lies of Dr.William Campbell were being
exposed. They have every right to be. Islam is criticized a
lot in Western countries. If someone defends it then
Muslims have all rights to cheer and applaud. See How Ali
Sina in the ends throws insult at the entire ummah
(community) of the Muslims. His foul-mouth never ends

More insults in the next paragraph
Ali Sina Writes:
Believe me, absurd thinking is the trait of Muslims.
Sometime ago I read an essay about a Muslim child asking
his religious teacher that the Quran says Jinns will be sent
to hell to be punished but the the Quran also says that
Jinns are made of fire, so how fire can be hurt by fire? The
teacher slapped the child and asked him if it hurts? The
poor lad responded yes, with tears in his eyes. "Like that!",
responded the teacher. "My hand is flesh and your face is
flesh but it still hurts". Foolish Muslims think this is such a
great reasoning. This is the fallacy of wrong analogy . But
the Muslim brain is not equipped with enough rationality
to think deep. He WANTS to believe and any nonsense will
do. There are several sites that have written against me. I
receive numerous emails from Muslims who have neither
read my articles nor those written by Muslims trying to
refute me. And yet these people tell me that I have
already been refuted and give me links to the same silly
sites. They WANT to believe that I am refuted. They will
believe anyone who claims he has refuted me without
searching the truth of that claim. The Muslim mind works
in bizarre ways .
My Response:
More foul-mouth from Ali Sina.
I put the link above of brother Umar's article which
exposes his insults and foul-mouth. I request brother
Umer to add these as well.
Oceanology of the Quran,
Ali Sina writes (In response to Dr.Naik)
(Ali Sina) If the separation of sweet and salt waters is an
observable phenomenon, as it seems that everyone agrees,
then how could no one know about it until "the
advancement of oceanology" made its knowledge possible?
What Muhammad is referring to is precisely that and
nothing more. There is no “invisible barrier” between two
waters, which is “forbidden to be trespassed”. There is no
barrier of any kind - no barzakh at all between waters.
Waters don’t mix immediately because of different
temperature and density but they eventually do, just like
when you pour cream in a cup of coffee. It takes time to
mix; that is why you stir it. Those who saw this
phenomenon must have relayed their observation to
others using figurative speech saying waters don’t mix AS
IF there is an invisible barrier between them. Our
ignorant Muhammad took this literally and claimed there
is an “invisible barrier” between them, which is “forbidden
to be trespassed”. Nothing can be further from the truth.
All waters mix and there is no barrier, invisible or
otherwise between them. When two rivers, carrying
sediments of different colors meet, or when sweet water
coming from rivers flows into the blue salty water of the
sea, one can see the line of demarcation sometimes
stretching for miles until they gradually blend. Where the
waters merge, i.e. what Dr. Naik refers to as the “slanting
homogenizing area”, is not a “barrier”. It is the opposite of
it. There the waters are not forbidden to trespass but
actually merge.
It is amazing that Muslims emphasize on the flagrant
errors of the Quran as its miracles. Who would buy this
nonsense except a totally ignorant person?
My Response:
Wait a minute, Where is the source of all this?? Dr.Zakir
Naik atleast quoted one scientist Dr.Hay.
The same site which Ali Sina accused Dr.Naik of copying
from explains this as well. It also gives the reference to the
book on oceanology written by Non-Muslim scientists.
http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1-b.htm
Is Islam for All Mankind?
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) As far as this statement of his is concerned,
regarding the Bible , I do agree with it totally - Because the
Bible was only meant for the children of Israel , for that
time. It is mentioned in the Gospel of Mathew, Ch. No. 10,
Verse No. 5 and 6, Jesus Christ peace be upon him tells his
disciples… ‘Go ye not in the way of the Gentiles.’ Who are
the Gentiles? The Non-Jews, the Hindus, the Muslims. ‘But
rather go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel .’ Jesus
Christ peace be upon him said in the Gospel of Mathew,
Ch. No. 15, Verse No. 24… ‘I am not sent, but to the lost
sheep of the house of Israel .’ So Jesus Christ and the Bible
were only meant for the children of Isreal. Since it was
meant for them, to analyze the Bible , you have to use the
meaning of the word, which was utilized at that time. But
the Qur’an was not meant only for the Arabs of that time.
Qur’an is not meant only for the Muslims. The Qur’an is
meant for the whole of humanity, and it is meant to be for
eternity.
(Ali Sina) Here again the Muslim audience broke in
applause and the sign of joy was visible from their
countenance. To them it was victory after victory.
However, had Dr. Naik told them that the Quran says that
Muhammad has come only for the Meccans alone and the
people around it they would not have rejoiced that much.
006.092 And this is a Book which We have sent down,
bringing blessings, and confirming (the revelations) which
came before it: that thou mayest warn the mother of cities
and all around her.
The mother of cities, Umul Qura, is Mecca. The same thing
is confirmed in verse:
042.007 Thus have We sent by inspiration to thee an
Arabic Qur’an: that thou mayest warn the Mother of Cities
and all around her.
In other places Allah says to Muhammad that he has come
for the people who did not receive guidance yet.
032.003 “Nay, it is the Truth from thy Lord, that thou
mayest admonish a people to whom no warner has come
before thee: in order that they may receive guidance.”
036.006 In order that thou mayest admonish a people,
whose fathers had received no admonition, and who
therefore remain heedless (of the Signs of Allah).
My Response:
Ali Sina here again quotes the verses and mispresents
them. Both the verses 6:92 and 42:7 say "Mother of cities
and All Around her "
ALL around her means the full world. Mecca is the centre
of the world and ALL around it is the full world. The
verses of the Quran do not prove that Islam is only for
Arabs Alone.
And in other two verses Allah is saying that he has sent
Muhammad (pbuh) to admonish the people to whom no
guidance has come before. Does it say that "admonish only
those people to whom no Warner had been sent"??
Definitely not !!! Allah (SWT) sends his final messenger
which is for the whole of humanity from those people to
whom a messenger had not been sent before.
Ali Sina Writes:
The people of the Book, i.e. the Jews, the Christians and
perhaps the Zoroastrians had their own messengers and
their guidance. The only people who had not received
guidance were the Arabs, specifically the Arabs of Mecca
and its surrounding. So, it is clear that Muhammad
claimed that he had come only for the Quraish and not for
the people of the Book and the rest of mankind. Of course,
as he became powerful, his ambitions grew and he
changed his mind later. Few Muslims know about these
verses. What do they say about them? If they truly
believe that the Quran is the word of God, they should stop
their da'wa and Jihad. The people of Mecca and its
surrounding have already converted to Islam. If Muslims
believe that the Quran is the word of God, how do they
dare to disobey Him and make da'wa elsewhere. Even if
Muhammad said they should attack other countries and
convert others into Islam, they should not listen to him but
do what the Quran says. Whose word is more important?
That of Allah or that of Muhammad? These verses should
also convince the non-Arab Muslims, including the
Egyptians, the Syrians, the Iraqis and all others now known
as Arabs that Islam is not for them. Islam is only for the
Meccans and its surrounding. They must leave Islam, if
they truly believe that the Quran is the word of God.
(Dr. Naik) Qur’an says in Surah Ibrahim, Ch. 14, Verse. 52,
in Surah Baqarah Ch. No. 2, Verse 185, and Surah Zumar
Ch. 39, Verses. 41, that the Qur’an is meant for the whole
of human kind. And Prophet Mohammed, may peace be
upon him, was not sent only for the Muslims or the Arabs.
Allah says in the Qur’an in Surah Ambiya Ch. No. 21, Verse
No. 107------(Arabic)---- That We have send thee as a
mercy, as a guidance, to the whole of humankind.’
(Ali Sina) Verse 14:52 says “ Hatha balaghun lilnnasi”. Nas is
people – any number of people. It could be people
gathered in a room. It could refer to the inhabitants of a
village, a town, a country and not necessarily ALL
Mankind. For example nas is used in verse 7.116 when
talking about the magic performed by the magicians of
Pharaoh who bewitched the eyes of the people ‘nas’. Are
we supposed to understand that all mankind were
bewitched? The same word is used in 2:185, 39:4 and
21:107. In all these verses Nas means "people" and not all
mankind. If we assume that the word 'nas' used in these
verses means all mankind then we have to admit that
there is flagrant contradiction in the Quran for the verses
6:92, 42:7, 32:3 and 36:6 clearly state that the Quran is for
the people of Mecca and its surrounding.
My Response :
Most of the Translations translate the word 'nas' as
'mankind' in the verses which Dr.Zakir Naik quoted. But
even if Ali Sina doesn't agree. Still other verses prove that
Quran is for entire humanity. Nowhere does the Quran say
that it is only for the Arabs. He deliberately mispresented
the verses he quoted to prove that.
More verses confirming Quran to be for entire humanity
"Blessed be He Who sent down the criterion (of right and
wrong, i.e. this Quran) to His slave (Muhammad SAW) that
he may be a warner to the Alameen (mankind and
jinns)." (Quran 25:1)
"But it is nothing less than a Message to all the
worlds ." (Quran 68:52)
"Verily this is no less than a Message to (all) the
Worlds :" (Quran 81:27)
"And no reward you (O Muhammad SAW) ask of them
(those who deny your Prophethood) for it, it(the Quran) is
no less than a Reminder and an advice unto the Alameen
(men and jinns)." (Quran 12:104)
The word used in the above 4 verses is "Alameen" meaning
"worlds".
Ali Sina Writes:
However, Muhammad also claimed to have been sent to
"creatures of both worlds". lilAAalameen. means
everything in both worlds. (That includes dogs and pigs.)
That is because he was a megalomaniac narcissist and
narcissists talk big. He even claimed to have come as
guidance for Jinns, which are mythical beings.
My Response:
He considers Jinns to be mythical beings. They are
mythical for him not for us. Its the matter of belief.
Science has not proven Jinns mythical. They may assume
them to be but there are no proves at all. He again insults
our beloved Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and calls him
narcissists (someone who is fascinated with himself).
Brother Umar has responded to this false charge. I too will
deal with it in the next para.
Ali Sina Writes:
"Narcissists have grandiose ideas about themselves. In a
Hadith Muhammad makes his Allah say to him: “Were it
not for you, I would not have created the universe.” [3]
Muhammad ibn Ali has narrated that Muhammad said:
"Among all the people of the world God chose the Arabs;
from among the Arabs he chose the Kinana; from Kinana
he chose the Quraish; from the Quraish he chose Bani
Hashim; from Bani Hashim he chose Me. [Tabaqat V. 1 p.
2] This man was full of himself - a true narcissist. So much
for the alleged equality in Islam. Arabs are the chosen
race. Arabs have known that always and they treat non
Arab Muslims with disdain. If you are a non-Arab Muslim,
you are accepting to be inferior. "
The source of it is given in the footnote
As-Saghaanee (d.650) said, this hadith is "maudu
(fabricated)" ['al-Ahaadeeth al-Mawdoo'aat' of as-
Saghaanee (pg. 7)] and likewise al-Albaanee ['Silsilah ad-
Da'eefah' (1/450 no.282)] ash-Shaykh Mulla Alee Qaaree
(d.1014) said, "maudu, but it's meaning is correct."
My Response:
All Ali Sina can do is quote fabricated hadith. This hadith
is a fabricated one according to scholars. But even if we
assume it is correct. Still it doesn't prove that he is
narcissist. Reasons :
1. Muhammad (pbuh) was considered an honest and
Truthful man even by the pagan Arabs before his
prophethood.
He spoke whatever God Almighty commanded him.
2. It is not only mentioned in the Hadith but it is also said
by God Almighty to Adam (pbuh) in the Gospel of
Barnabas. Chapter 39. It reads
"'Adam, having sprung up upon his feet, saw in the air a
writing that shone like the sun, which said: "There is only
one God, and Mohammed is the messenger of God."
Whereupon Adam opened his mouth and said: "I thank
thee, O Lord my God, that thou hast deigned to create me;
but tell me. I pray thee, what meaneth the message of
these words: "Mohammed is messenger of God. Have there
been other men before me?"
'Then said God: "Be thou welcome, O my servant
Adam. I tell thee that thou art the first man whom I have
created And he whom thou hast seen [mentioned] is thy
son, who shall come into the world many years hence, and
shall be my messenger, for whom I have created all
things; who shall give light to the world when he shall
come;"
http://www.barnabas.net/barnabasP39.html
Christians deny the Gospel of Barnabas. The Historians do
not deny it. For the authenticity of Gospel of Barnabas
refer to :
http://www.natheal.com/NaturalHealingMethodologies/
WorldReligions/history_of_the_gospel_of_bar.htm
http://www.barnabas.net/
Paul said about Barnabas.
"If he comes unto you, receive him. (Colossians 4:10)"
Muhammad (pbuh) is not narcissist. But its again
allegations and lies by Ali Sina. Refer to Brother Umar
article for responses to all the charges against Muhammad
(pbuh) by Ali Sina
http://www.answering-christianity.com/umar/
true_face_of_ali_sina_2.htm
Embryology continuation
Ali Sina again claims that Dr.Zakir Naik fooled the
audience. According to him Dr.Keith Moore and
Dr.Bucaille fooled the Muslims.

Ali Sina Writes:
(Ali Sina) Are we supposed to believe that Dr. Keith
Moore, who was the chairman and the head of the
department of Anatomy, of a major university did not
know how human embryo looks? The truth is that Dr.
Moore and Dr. Bucaille fooled Muslims by telling them
what they wanted to hear and in this way they ingratiated
the Saudi King who in turn lavished them with a lot of
petrodollars
My Response :
Now this is turning out to be funny. In Brief, I will tell you
the sick mentality of Ali Sina.
If a Muslim scientist writes something about Science that
matches the Quran then he is a liar and a deceiver. If a
non-Muslim scientist does it then he is doing it for the sake
of petrodollars. This is turning out to be more and more
stupid from Ali Sina.
Ali Sina believes Dr.William Campbell spoke the Truth.
Why? Because he opposed the Quran. The reason is
obvious.
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) What Dr. William Campbell showed you is the
other perspective of it. If I show this book - it looks like a
rectangle - If I show you like that, it is a different
perspective. That diagram is given in the book - The
diagram which you saw on the slide is even there - And I’ll
deal with it InshaAllah.
(Ali Sina) Here again the gullible audience became
euphoric and clapped without realizing that Dr. Naik is
engaging in the fallacy of suppressing the evidence. Dr.
Campbell showed the picture of the embryo from the front
and from the side. Dr. Naik wants to convince his audience
that they should look at it from one angle only – the angle
that it most resembles a leech. Of course one who is
determined to be fooled would be willing to look at things
by standing on his head, if that helps him to see them
from the exact angle that would reconfirm his unreasoned
faith. That is why Muslims are unable to see the truth.
Their tunnel vision does not allow them to see things from
all angles. If only they changed their perspective a little,
they would see that Islam is nothing but a big lie.
My Response:
I told you people its turning out to be more and more
funny. This is the photograph, which Dr.Zakir Naik
showed.
http://www.islam-guide.com/ch1-1-a.htm
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Professor Keith Moore, after about 80 questions
were asked to him, he said… ‘If you would have asked me
these 80 questions, 30 years ago, I would not have been
able to answer more than 50 percent - Because
embryology has developed recently in the past 30 years.’
He said this in the eighties.
Now, do we believe Dr. Keith Moore whose statement is
available outside in the foyer - his videocassette is
available… ‘This is the truth’...’Anna-ul-Haq’... recorded
statement. So will you believe Dr. William Campbell’s
personal conversation with Professor Keith Moore, or the
one mentioned in this book, with Islamic edition as well as
the photograph that I had shown to you? And in the
videocassette available outside you can see it - He makes
those statements. So you have to choose which is more
logical - Personal discussion with Dr. William Campbell or
his statement on Video. Like how Dr. William Campbell
showed my video - 100 percent proof what I said…
(Ali Sina) This is again a false reasoning. What Dr. Moore
said to Dr. Campbell and what he said in the videos
intended to be sold to Muslims could be two different
things.
My Response:
If Dr.Keith Moore had done such a thing. If someone had
caught him then it will completely ruin his reputation and
no more "petrodollars.” Furthermore, his book is used
more by non-Muslims than Muslims. More non-Muslim
medical colleges use this book than Muslim medical
colleges. Dr.Keith Moore wasn’t an Arab Muslim.
Therefore, we have no reason to doubt him. Since more
Non-Muslims refer to his book, he would NEVER write in
favor of the Quran if he was really greedy of
“petrodollars.”
Ali Sina Writes:
. He would have made a fool of himself telling Dr.
Campbell what he says for Muslim consumption. We are
not here to probe whether Dr. Moore is a liar or Dr.
Campbell is reporting him erroneously. We must look at
the medical science. We don't need the opinions of the
experts when we can easily find the facts on our own.
Appealing to authority is called argumentum ad
verecundiam and this is another logical fallacy. We must
see whether what the Quran says is supported by science
or not. We must not accept the words of anyone just
because they are authorities. They could have some
ulterior motives. They might have lied and
misrepresented the truth for some personal gain. The
ultimate authority is science, not Dr. Moore, Dr. Bucaille
or Dr. Campbell. Dr. Campbell has proved his case
backing his argument with pictures. Unless someone can
produce pictures that tell a different story, the claims of
this doctor or that doctor are irrelevant. Once things are
demonstrated to us, we can dispense with the opinions of
authorities.
My Response :
We actually do not need experts to tell us about science
but we need Scientists like Ali Sina to tell us that.
Dr.William Campbell showed the slides and Dr.Zakir Naik
convincingly answered to them. He did it from the medical
book written by a well-reputed scientist Dr.Keith Moore.
Ali Sina tells us that scientific data is available and we do
not need experts to tell us.
Wait a minute, which scientific data? The scientific
discoveries done by the world’s greatest scientist Ali
Sina?? Which science is he talking about? Who writes the
books of science if not the great scientists?? Are they
written in heavens and thrown down to us from there? As I
proved above. Dr.Moore was not a Muslim either and he
has no ulterior motives. If he lies then it can simply ruin
his reputation. Moreover, he will have no more
"petrodollars.”
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) ‘Moon is reflected light’ - I’ll come to it later on.
And whatever additional information he got from Qur’an
and Hadith, it was incorporated later into this book…‘The
Developing Human’ - the 3 rd edition and this book got an
award for the best medical book written by a single author
in that year.
(Ali Sina) Is Dr. Naik telling us that Dr. Moore got an
award for the book he wrote claiming the ridiculous Quran
is scientific? Who gave that award? Al Azhar University or
the Grand Mosque in Medina? What is the name of that
award?
My Response:
This is turning to be more and more funny every time. Al-
Azhar University and Grand Mosque don't go around
giving awards. It definitely got the award from medical
authorities. He considers the Qur'an ridiculous. Thats what
ALL islamophobists do.
Dr. Keith Moore had earlier authored the book, 'The
Developing Human'.After acquiring new knowledge from
the QUR'AN, he wrote, in 1982, the 3rd edition of the same
book, 'The Developing Human'. The book was the recipient
of an award for the best medical book written by a single
author. This book has been translated into several major
languages of the world and is used as a textbook of
embryology in the first year of medical studies. In 1981,
during the Seventh Medical Conference in Dammam, Saudi
Arabia, Dr. Moore said, "It has been a great pleasure for
me to help clarify statements in the QUR'AN about human
development. It is clear to me that these statements must
have come to MUHAMMAD---sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam---
from GOD or ALLAH, because almost all of this knowledge
was not discovered until many centuries later. This proves
to me that MUHAMMAD---sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam---
must have been a messenger of GOD or ALLAH{The
reference for this statement is the video tape titled 'This is
the Truth'.For a copy of this video tape contact the Islamic
Research Foundation}
Ali Sina then goes on to tell us about the scientific
discoveries done by him. He keeps making a joke and a
fool of himself. He did not give any source of all his crap.
Ali Sina always says "this is not true" and "that is not true"
without giving us any source from any medical book.
After explaining all the embryological stages, When
Dr.Zakir Naik mentioned that the Quranic stages on
embryology are based on appearance.
Ali Sina writes:
(Ali Sina) Here our good doctor is making a major shift of
strategy. Now, he is no longer insisting that the Quranic
description of the embryo is scientific. He says that the
Quran talks about the “appearance” that exist between a
clot, a leech and the embryo in its different stages of
growth. If so, why claim that the Quran is scientific and
miraculous? In the past, women had miscarriage way
more than today. The fetus was aborted and they could
see that it remotely resembled, first to a clot of blood and
then to a leech. In the absence of a microscope this is all
they could see. So, where is the miracle? Why make so
much ado about it saying “how could Muhammad have
known this 1400 years ago?” when such a prosaic
knowledge was available to anyone for eons? In fact as Dr.
Campbell noted, Hippocrates described the embryonic
growth much more accurately.
My Response:
When did Dr.Zakir Naik ever insist that all the stages are
based on function? He always insisted that stages are
based on appearance. The appearance of the embryo in all
the stages was not known at that time. How did Prophet
Muhammad (pbuh) know that embryo looks like a leech?
(Which I proved above with a photograph which was
shown by Dr.Zakir Naik from the book of Dr.Keith Moore)
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) Professor Keith Moore took plastic seal, and bit
between his teeth to make it look like a ‘ Mutga ’- The teeth
marks resembled the ‘somites.’ Dr. William Campbell
said… ‘When the ‘Alaqa ’ becomes a ‘Mutga ’ the clinging is
yet there - It is there till 8 and a half months- So… the
Qur’an is wrong.’ I told you in the beginning, the Qur’an is
describing the appearance. ‘The leech like’ appearance
and the ‘clot like’ appearance, is changed to the ‘chewed’
like appearance. It yet continues to cling till the end -
There is no problem. But the stages are divided on
appearance - Not on the function.
(Ali Sina) Alaqa either means something that clings or clot
of blood. One word in one sentence cannot have two
different meanings. If alaqa is something that clings, then
the fetus should be called alaqa during all its gestation.
Why then the Quran says it becomes mutga ? If it’s only the
appearance to the clot, then we should discard Dr.
Bucaille’s suggestion who says this word should be
translated as “something that clings”. If the Quran is clear,
then why this much confusion?
My Response:
The Quran is speaking about the embryological stages
based on appearance. When it describes Alaqa , Also the
function befits here. But even if you ignore the function
here. Still the embryo looks like a clot as well like the leech
as Dr.Zakir Naik proved in his talk and Ali Sina agrees that
embryo does look like a clot. The Qur'an is not confusing.
The Islamophobists will find it confusing irrespective how
clear it is. The translation may be confusing. But the
Arabic text is very clear.
Dr.Zakir Naik then spoke about Mudga and formation of
muscles and bones. To that Ali Sina writes :

Ali Sina:
(Ali Sina) This description is wrong no matter how many
times it is repeated. I quote again what Dr. Campbell said
in the conclusion of his talk on embryo: “ There is no time
when calcified bones have been formed, and then the muscles
are placed around them. The muscles are there, several
weeks before there are calcified bones, rather than being
added around previously formed bones, as the Qur’an states .”
This statement is scientific. The Quran is not.
My Response:
Wrong according to who? Scientific discoveries done by Ali
Sina? Dr.Zakir Naik responded very convincingly to
Dr.Campbell and Dr.Campbell did not say anything against
it.
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) As Professor Keith Moore said that… ‘The stages
- that how it is described in modern embryology… stage
1,2,3,4,5, is so confusing, The Qur’an ic stage on
embryology describing on the base of appearance, and the
shape, is far more superior.’ Alhamdulillah.
(Ali Sina) This is ludicrous. How can the Quran be superior
when it is all wrong? Josef Goebbel, Hitler's minister for
propaganda said: "If you tell a big enough lie, frequently
enough, it becomes the truth. " This is what Dr. Naik wants
to achieve. He wants to repeat a lie frequently enough,
until it becomes true. I am sorry. It does not work in this
case. The description of the embryo in the Quran is all
wrong. It won’t become true even if it is repeated a billion
times. Bones are not created first to be covered with flesh
later. Period!
My Response:
The Qur'an may be all wrong according to the scientific
knowledge and discoveries done by Ali Sina. Let me
remind you he has NOT given any source from where he
got his information. Now shall we agree with Dr.Keith
Moore who is a reputed scientist or Islamophobists like Ali
Sina?? He goes on to quote minister of Hitler. Dr.Zakir
Naik didn’t lie frequently. He quoted all from great
scientists like Dr.Keith Moore etc.
Note:
Up till now, Ali Sina has not
quoted a single medical book
to back any of his claims!
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Therefore he said… therefore he said that… ‘I
have no objection in accepting that Prophet Muhammed is
the messenger of God and that this Glorious Qur’an has to
be a Divine Revelation, from Almighty God.’
(Ali Sina) If Dr. Naik is speaking of Dr. Moore, it should be
noted that he did not convert to Islam. This tells us that his
interests were this-worldly. He did not see any miracles in
the Quran. He simply fooled the Muslims and laughed his
way to the bank.
My Response:
What bank? What Money?? Ali Sina has not provided any
proof whatsoever. The Quran says
"Those are their (vain) desires. Say: "Produce your proof
if ye are truthful ." (Quran 2:111)
Dr.Moore did not accept Islam because of other reasons. If
he had accepted Islam then Ali Sina would have called him
a liar. Ali Sina considers Muslims to be liars by nature
Source
If he didn’t accept then he fooled the Muslims. In either
way, he'll be spoken against. Why?? Because he wrote
something good about the Qur'an.
Did Ali Sina forget about other scientists and learned men
who have embraced Islam?? Like Professor Thagada
Shaun , Jeffery Lang and others.
Ali Sina further goes on to call Allah (SWT) a saddist. He
comes up with a ludicruous example of a cat. He is
comparing cats with human beings. He says that he
wouldn't do such a merciless thing to a cat. But he wants
worse to be done to Muslims. He says "As long as Muslims
are Muslims they do not deserve to be treated in
accordance to the Universal Declaration of Human
Right." ( Source
He further says “They must be colonized and ruled with
iron fist” ( Source
According to Ali Sina "Muslims are not humans"
( Source
For more insults, refer to
Ali Sina’s foul mouth exposed
He forgot that we human beings are not allowed to do such
a thing to any other human being.. Human beings are
responsible for their own actions. The Qur'an says
"...it is not God that hath wronged them, but they wrong
themselves." (Quran 3:117)
If Allah (SWT) starts punishing us for good deeds, he will
not leave a single of us on earth. On the day of judgement
no human being can claim that he is treated against the
mercy of Allah. Allah (SWT) besides being merciful is also
just. He will treat everyone in a just way. Suppose that
today someone catches Hitler. What punishment can one
give him for the incineration of 6 million Jews?? and
indirectly his life caused death of 30-60 million human
beings. Maximum we can do is kill him and burn him
once. But who will compensate for 5,999,999 other lives??
That is why we must also conclude that this life is not
complete. A person may be punished and may not get
punished. Allah will even forgive blasphemous people like
Ali Sina, Sam Shamoun etc. if they repent. The Qur'an
says :
"Say: "O my Servants who have transgressed against their
souls! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah: for Allah forgives
all sins: for He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful." (Qur'an
39:53)
Our good deeds are multiplied by Allah (SWT) by 10 and
our bad deeds are not multiplied even twice. The Qur'an
says
"He that doeth good shall have ten times as much to his
credit: He that doeth evil shall only be recompensed
according to his evil: no wrong shall be done unto (any of)
them" (Quran 6:160)
The Holy Quran says :
".... but if any does evil, the doers of evil are only punished
(to the extent) of their deeds ." (Quran 28:84)
This had nothing to do with the debate between Dr.Zakir
Naik and Dr.William Campbell. Therefore, I won’t go into
the detail of it. Lets continue with the main point of it.
Ali Sina Writes:
If it was not so depressing, it would have been funny that
Dr. Naik should choose such a macabre statement of the
Quran to prove its alleged miracle. What part of this
stupid verse is miraculous? All it reveals is a sick mind of a
fool. Dr. Naik speaks from the position of utter ignorance.
In the old days no one knew that brain had anything to do
with sensing pain or even thinking. Aristotle thought that
brain acts like a radiator to cool the body. Thinking was
done with heart, they believed. We still say memorizing
things by heart. People feel pain right where it hurts.
Pinch or slap yourself and see where do you feel it? Do you
feel it in your brain? You feel the pain right where you are
hurting yourself. So what part of this simplistic statement
is miraculous? Muhammad is stating the obvious. There is
no miracle in these harebrained verses. They do not
reveal any science.
My Response:
People may have known that skin is responsible for pain.
But people did not know that if you burn a skin
continuously it will lose the tendency of burning anymore.
That is what doctors do today when a patient of burn
injury comes. They take a pin and prick in that area. If the
patient feels pain the doctor is happy because its a
superficial burn. If the patient does not feel pain then its
deep burn. That is the miraculous point about it. And we
may well ask. If this was known since ages. Then why is the
discovery of pain receptors considered a recent discovery.
Why isn't it considered a discovery that was done eons
ago?
Ali Sina on Professor Tegatat Tagashaun.
Ali Sina Writes:
(Ali Sina) Professor Thagada Shaun must be a fool.
Heaven knows if such an idiot actually exists or he is a
fabrication of Muslim wishful thinking. These verses are
stupid. Not only they reveal that Muhammad was a sadist,
they also contain no scientific information whatsoever.
Muslims have based their entire faith on logical fallacies.
"Doctor so and so has confirmed the Quran so Islam must
be true" is an asinine argument. There are many more
authentic doctors and professors born and raised in Islam
who reject this cult and have left it. They find Islam and
the Quran utterly stupid. Why not listen to them?
My Response:
Ali Sina forget that the joke is on him. He is not a
fabrication of Muslim wishful thinking. He is/was a
professor at Chang Mai University in Thailand. Ali Sina,a
coward who hides behind the internet and thinks he is a
genius. Which doctors proved the Quran to be
unscientific?? 'Dr' Ali Sina or some doctor from his
clowns?
Ad Hominem in the Quran
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Qur’an calls such people, as in Surah Baqarah
Ch. 2, Verse 18…(Arabic)… ‘The deaf, the dumb, the blind,
they will not return to the true path. ’ The Bible says the
same thing in Gospel of Mathew, Ch. No. 13, Verse No. 13…
‘Seeing they see not, hearing they hear not, neither will
they understand.’
(Ali Sina) This is called poisoning the well or the famous ad
hominem fallacy. The Quran fails to give one solid
argument that cannot be successfully refuted. Instead of
proof, Muhammad tried to undermine the intelligence and
sincerity of those who did not agree with his irrational
claims. He did not stop there. He then went on ordering
his demented followers to fight, and wage war against the
unbelievers, to crucify them, to cut their fingertips and to
slay them wherever they find them.
My Response:
The Quran has given many points. This whole site is
dedicated to it.
http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/scientific_index.html
Yes, Muhammad (pbuh) did ask his followers to fight and
slay the idolaters in battlefields in self defence and against
oppression and tyranny.
Ali Sina Writes:
(Ali Sina) Both the Bible and the Quran contain absurdities,
obscenities and innumerable scientific errors. However
since the thinking Christians and Jews know that the Bible
is not the verbatim word of God, but stories written by
men who allegedly were inspired but nonetheless fallible,
they take their scriptures with a grain of salt. This allows
them to adapt to the changing time and let their
intelligence be their guide.
My Response:
Quran contains no absurdities. No unscientific points. No
contradictions. Musims have kept refuting the so-called
unscientific pionts, absurdities and contradictions.
Dr.Zakir Naik refuted all of them in the debate to which Ali
Sina responded and I am writing a counter-rebuttal to it.
The Jews and Christians change their religion because it
has problems and is not practicing anymore. The Muslims
do not do that because we do not have any problem with
our religion and we keep practicing it till today and
thousands of non-Muslims are accepting Islam everyday
throughout the world.
Ali Sina Writes:
Because Muslims think the Quran is the verbatim words of
God, they can’t change it. They are stuck in the 7 th
century and can’t go forward. Other religions are living.
They are growing and changing. Islam is fossilized.
My Response:
Hilarious indeed !! Those who change their scripture are
good according to Ali Sina. I want to know, Do Christians
agree that changing scripture is alright? Do they have
authority to change their religion however they like?? Do
they agree that any Christian can write his own bible?
Definitely not!! This is again falsehood from Ali Sina.
He considers other religions to be growing. He doesn't
really realize that he is making a fool of himself once
again. Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world.
Non-Muslim sources also agree with that. e.g Guiness
World Records, CNN etc.

Ali Sina Writes:
This will bring the downfall of Islam. Because Islam is
unchangeable it is bound to break and fall apart. Precisely
because of this reason, other religions have a future, but
Islam has none. Other religions will survive this century
and many more, but Islam will not. Islam will meet its
death, thanks to its own rigidity.
My Response:
Much to his wishful thinking. Yes, Islam is unchangeable; it
will remain as it is till the day of Judgement. Its an eternal
religion unlike others which change with the passage of
time and are no more practicable today. According to Ali
Sina Islam will not survive this century. I believe he is
watching cartoonnetwork more and more everyday. Islam
is Alhumdulillah growing more and more everyday and it
will prevail over the full world. Thats the promise of Allah
(SWT) in the Qur'an.
"It is He Who hath sent His Apostle with guidance and the
Religion of Truth, to proclaim it over all religion, even
though the Pagans may detest (it)." (Quran 9:33)
Ali Sina Writes:
The Christians and the Jews can overlook those errors and
attribute them to the fallibility of the scribes. The Biblical
prophets were humans and they could have erred
My Response:
Oh Really?? I want to hear from answeringislam team if
they really believe that bible contains errors. I also want
to hear on that from other Christian sites. Christians are
the ones who shout on the top of their voices that BIBLE IS
INFALLIBLE WORD OF GOD.
Note : Ali Sina is telling everyone that Bible has errors,
unscientific points and absurdities. But still
answeringislam team have put him on their site.
They too are pathetic people like Ali Sina. They don’t mind
anyone saying anything against their religion. They are
happy as long as Islam is attacked.
Ali Sina Writes:
They must either accept the Quran as one package or
reject it in its entirety. This claim of authenticity that
Muslims think is the strength of the Quran, is actually the
cause of its fall.
Jesus said: "I have much more to say to you, more than you
can now bear. But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he
will guide you into all truth". John 16:12 -13
My Response:
Yes, We believe the Quran to be 100% authentic and
correct. Ali Sina here quoted Jesus (pbuh). He din't realize
that the joke is on him. This "Spirit of Truth" is none other
than Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).
http://www.answering-christianity.com/prediction.htm
Ali Sina Writes:
The spirit of the truth has come. It is the new age of
enlightenment. The gates of knowledge and understanding
are flung open and new truths are being revealed every
day. Christians know that knowledge of God is not limited
to what is in the Bible. They know that truth is infinite.
They are open to learn new things. Muslims don't know
that. Muslims foolishly think God’s knowledge is limited.
That everything He wanted to say He has already said it in
the Quran and there is nothing more to learn. They think
the hands of God are tied and his wisdom is dried out. That
is why Christianity, and all other religions that allow
change are alive and Islam is dead.
My Response:
New Truths are being revealed everyday and every aspect
of Islam is being proven to be the Truth. More and More
people are embracing Islam everyday. Other religions are
not true; they cannot stand the test of times. But Islam is
the Truth, it will stand till the eternity.
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) purpose of my presentation on ‘Bible and
science’ is not to hurt any Christian’s feeling. If while
presenting, if I hurt your feelings, I do apologize in
advance.
(Ali Sina) Dr. Naik is gauging Christians with Islamic
yardstick. It’s Muslims who get offended, make riots, burn
churches and embassies and kill innocent people if their
religion is criticized. Christians have been taking criticisms
for a long time and if those criticisms were correct, they
have changed their ways and beliefs. That is why I call
Christianity a living faith and Islam a dead and fossilized
faith.
My Response:
Yes,Muslims do get offended. We love Islam more than our
own family. What if I enter your house and abuse your
mother?? Will anyone let me go Scott free? NO !!. We love
Islam more than our own family, we feel proud to be
Muslims and we do get offended if someone insults it (not
criticize). Most of the human beings get offended if their
religion is being attacked including Christians.
Ali Sina here calls Christianity a “Living faith” and he also
quoted Jesus (pbuh). It makes more and more difficult to
believe that he is a Former Iranian Muslim. Since no-one
knows him in person. There is no proof whatsoever that he
is a Former Iranian Muslim.
I believe he too is a Pathetic Christian who attacks
Islam.
Creation of the Universe in the Quran
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) First we deal with Astronomy. The Bible speaks
about the creation of the universe. In the beginning, 1st
Book, Book of Genesis, 1 st Ch. , it is mentioned - It says…
‘Almighty God created the Heavens and the Earth, in six
days and talks about a evening and a morning, referring to
a 24 - hour day. Today scientists tell us, that the universe
cannot be created in a 24 hour period of six days. Qur’an
too speaks about six ‘ayyams’ . The Arabic word singular is
‘yaum’ plural is ‘ayyam’ . It can either mean a day of 24
hours, or it is a very long period, a ‘yaum’ , an epoch.
Scientists say we have no objection in agreeing that the
universe - it could have been created in 6 very long
periods.
(Ali Sina) Here Dr. Naik is vividly revealing the hypocrisy
and the double standard that characterizes the Muslim
mind. The story of the creation stated in the Quran is
borrowed from the Bible. So, logically, what is true about
the original version is also true about its copy. What is
good for the goose is also good for the gander. However
Dr. Naik says that the days stated in the Bible should be
interpreted as 24-hours days while the days stated in the
Quran should be interpreted as unspecified periods of
time - eons. Why this double standard?
My Response:
Ali Sina again proves himself stupid. Dr.Zakir Naik made it
very clear that why it is referring to 24-hour day because
it speaks of a MORNING & EVENING . Morning and
Evening refer to a 24 hour day. I'll quote the verses here
from Genesis 1:3-5
"3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4
God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light
from the darkness. 5 God called the light "day," and the
darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and
there was morning —the first day."
The Quran does not speak of evening and morning when
describing the days. Therefore, the Biblical verses refer to
six 24-hour days whereas the Quranic verses refer to 6
eon
Ali Sina Writes:
It is because the Muslim mind is a sick mind, bereft of
fairness and commonsense.
My Response:
More insults from Ali Sina on Muslims. I request Brother
Umar to add these as well.
Ali Sina Writes:
This story, whether in its original version stated in the
Bible or in its plagiarized version rehashed in the Quran is
fairytale. No scientist has ever said that the universe has
been created in six phases. Geologists have divided the
history of the Earth in several epochs, which have nothing
to do with the Biblical and the Quranic version of creation,
but the history of the universe is not demarked by phases.
This is clearly an error.
My Response:
Dr.Zakir Naik never said universe is created in six phases.
Note the words of Dr.Naik " Scientists say we have no
objection in agreeing that the universe - it could have
been created in 6 very long periods ." Ali Sina lies once
again. Regarding Quran copied from the bible. I put the
answer from Dr.Zakir Naik above. I'll put it again
http://www.irf.net/irf/dtp/dawah_tech/t18/t18a/pg1.htm
Ali Sina Writes:
Six or eight days of creation?
Sura 7:54, 10:3, 11:7, and 25:59 say that God created "the
heavens and the earth" in six days. But this is contradicted
in Sura 41:9-12
My Response:
This is another so called contradiction brought by Ali Sina.
I think he is too desperate to write something against
Islam. Dr.Zakir Naik himself replies to this.
Refer to question no.14 here.
http://www.irf.net/irf/dtp/dawah_tech/t15/t15b/pg1.htm
Read the response and see how clearly Ali Sina is deceiving
the reader.
Ali Sina Writes:
Furthermore, verse 7.54 says “Your Guardian-Lord is
Allah, Who created the heavens and the earth in six days,
and is firmly established on the throne (of authority): He
draweth the night as a veil over , each seeking the other
in rapid succession."
This statement can be accepted as poetry but it is not
scientific: Darkness is the absence of light, therefore the
cannot be compared to a "veil" drawn over the day.
My Response:
This is the way human beings speak. If Ali Sina is not a
human that does not mean the Quran is wrong. This is how
everyone speaks in day-to-day life. If I say "there is too
much silence here." Can anyone stand up and object that I
am unscientific?? Silence is absence of sound. But no one
will ever stand and point that I am unscientific. Suppose if
I says "There is too much darkness in the cave" can
anybody say I am unscientific?? Darkness is absence of
light. But no will still say that I am unscientific. This is how
human beings speak INCLUDING scientists. Allah (SWT)
has given the Quran for the human beings so that we can
understand.
The above answer by Dr.Zakir Naik answers all the other
points which Ali Sina has raised on the order of the
creation heavens. Heavens and the Earth were created
together. But there is one more point which he raised that
I'll be touching.
Regarding Seven heavens.
Ali Sina fails to realize that the Quran is originally in
Arabic. In Arabic and other Semitic languages "Seven" is
used often to describe indefinite form of Plural. Many
commentators like Muhammad Asad etc. have explained.
"Seven" is used in several other places in the Quran as an
indefinite form of Plural.
"To it are seven gates: for each of those gates is a (special)
class (of sinners) assigned" (Quran 15:44)
"And if all the trees on earth were pens and the ocean
(were ink), with seven oceans behind it to add to its
(supply), yet would not the words of Allah be exhausted
(in the writing): for Allah is Exalted in Power, full of
Wisdom." (Quran 31:27)
Again in the above 2 verses "seven" is used as indefinite
form of plural. It was even used in the texts at the time of
the Quran and even in several Hadith
Contradictions in the Bible and the Quran
Ali Sina Writes:
(Ali Sina) Yes indeed, there are many contradictions in the
Bible. But there are even more contradictions in the
Quran. I will list a few of them at the end of this paper. Let
us mention one of them here.
My Response:
See how Ali Sina tells everyone that Bible has got
contradictions. But yet Answeringislam team puts this
response in their rebuttal section to Dr.Zakir Naik. They
are like drowning men catching at straws. They do not
care if someone calls the bible wrong. They are simply too
desperate like Ali Sina to write something against the
Quran and Muslims.
Ali Sina Writes:
22:47 and 32:5 say that Allah's day equal to 1,000 human
years. But 70:4 says that it equal to 50,000 years.
My Response:
Regarding the above contradiction. I can again do no
better than post let Dr.Zakir Naik himself reply to this.
http://www.irf.net/irf/dtp/dawah_tech/t15/t15b/pg1.htm
For more refutations to so-called "contradictions" in the
Quran. Refer to:
http://www.answering-christianity.com/quran/
quranerr.htm
Is Sky a Dome?
Ali Sina comes up with another pathetic response. He on
his site gives some stupid diagrams of his to show that
earth is flat. No where does the Quran say that earth is
flat. There are certain verses, which critics may assume.
The most common one is
"And Allah has made the earth for you as a carpet (spread
out)."
[Al-Qur’an 71:19]"
Ali Sina hasn't quoted this verse here. But I came across
many other articles on his site which have used this verse
to "prove" earth is flat.
Dr.Zakir Naik also responds to this.
http://www.irf.net/irf/dtp/dawah_tech/t15/t15b/pg1.htm
(See question 8 in the above link)
Ali Sina Writes:
022:065
Seest thou not that God has made subject to you (men) all
that is on the earth, and the ships that sail through the sea
by His Command? He withholds the sky from falling on the
earth except by His leave: for God is Most Kind and Most
Merciful to man.
Yusuf Ali realizing the absurdity of this verse deceptively
has added (rain) in parenthesis after the word sky. No
other translator has done that and there is no mention of
rain in the Arabic version .
My Response:
To know what Yusuf Ali really meant. Read footnote 2874
of his commentary.
Ali Sina again I believe is too desperate. He uses the word
"version" for the Quran. In reality there is no such thing as
"version" of the Quran. Quran is only one throughout the
history and is maintained in its original Arabic text.
Ali Sina Writes:
(Yusuf Ali's translation of the Quran is the most deceptive
and the least trustworthy. If you have to read the Quran in
English I suggest read several translations simultaneously
and trust the most damaging translation because it is the
most truthful
My Response:
Hilarious indeed!! Anyone broad-minded person who
reads this will realize that Ali Sina is not only unscholarly
in his approach but he is also mentally unstable at the
same time. He considers the most "damaging" translation
to be most truthful irrespective whatever it is !! Hilarious
Indeed !!
Ali Sina then quotes the commentary of Ibn-Kathir and
writes
Ali Sina Writes:
So scholars debated whether the dome of the sky is
sustained by invisible pillars or it is hovering over earth
without pillars miraculously thanks to Allah's power. But
everyone agreed that the sky is a dome. "
My Response:
Irrespective whether you take that sky has pilars or not.
The negative side of the picture is that sky has pillars. Any
unbiased reader who reads will realize that Quran is only
speaking metaphorically. It is in no way speaking in literal
sense. The sky is a dome. I agree with that. I gave a link.
I'll put it again.
http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/scientific_21.html
What the Quran is speaking that sky is a dome. If Allah
(SWT) does not hold it back. It will fall on the earth. This
holding back of sky by Allah, The Quran describes as
"Without any pillars that ye can see." It still doesn't prove
Quran to be unscientific even if I agree with the
interpretation of Ali Sina.

Abdulsalam20: THE MAIN REASON WHY CAMPBELL STATEMENT IS HARD TO FIND ON NET IS BECAUSE PEOPLE KNOW THAT CAMPBELL PERFORM WOEFULLY EVEN ON CHRISTIAMNS SITE ITS NT THERE BUT ALI SINA LATER COMMENTED ON THE VIDEO THAT DR ZAKR NAIK IS A MAGICIAN AND ALI TRIED TO DEFEND THE CHRISTIAN BUT EVERY TYN HAS BEEN RESPONDED TO

Now you said everyone knows that Campbell performed woefully. If Dr. Campbell performed woefully, does it mean that ALL the POINT raised by Dr. Zakir are valid?

The reason why I didn't subscribe to Ali Sina reply is because he's a Christian/FREETHINKER and ONLY try to reiterate with the point that ALL CHALLENGES raised by Dr. Zakir can also be used against Quran.....though he's right.....Remember my first statement in my first post.

But for you to say you can't find it on CHRISTIAN SITE is a pure lie, here is the rebuttal.

http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Naik/index.htm

Then he goes on to quote some Muslim from medieval
ages. He puts some pictures from some old books. He
quotes this person, that person.
Give me a break Ali Sina !!
Are we talking about Muslims of medieval age or are we
talking about the Quran??
So why is Ali Sina desperately bringing irrelevant points??
I believe his blood pressure is getting high. He is too
desperate to write against Islam.
Poisonous Plants
Ali Sina Writes:
(Ali Sina) The fact that some plants and seeds are
poisonous is not a new knowledge. This was known by very
ancient people. Any reasonable person can understand
that when the Bible says “I give you every seed-bearing
plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that
has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food”, it
does not mean that you should eat even the poisonous
ones.
My Response:
Lets read the verse properly
"30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of
the air and all the creatures that move on the ground—
everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every
green plant for food." And it was so." (Genesis 1:30)
The bible says "EVERY GREEN PLANT FOR FOOD." Do
words have any meaning in the language of Ali Sina?? Well
I cannot help if he cannot even understand plain English.
Such irresponsible statements can be made only by human
beings and not by God.
Ali Sina Writes:
The poisonous plants can have medicinal benefits. The
Bible makes it clear that as far as Jehovah is concerned no
seed or plant is a forbidden food. It is up to humans to
discover the benefits of each plant and use it in a way that
would improve their lives.
My Response:
Medicinal benefits, NOT for eating purposes. God has told
us what to eat and what not to eat. The things which he
commanded to be unlawful are unlawful where has things
which he has permitted to have are lawful.
Ali Sina Writes:
Prohibited foods in the Quran are specified, human flesh is
not among them. Does that mean that Muslims are
licensed to consume that? The god of the Christians and
the Jews has given to his followers some commonsense too.
My Response:
Ali Sina is getting more and more desperate. No where
does the Quran say that human flesh if permitted and no
where does the Quran even say irresponsible statements
like "All food are permitted".
Is Human flesh permitted??
Ali Sina is so pathetic, I really feel ashamed to even reply
to such points. Nevertheless, I'll reply as briefly as I can to
this absurd point of Ali Sina.
The only way in which we will be allowed to have human
flesh is if we slay the human being the way we slay the
animal. If the human being dies, we cannot eat because
dead flesh is prohibited (Quran 2:173,6:145,5:3 and
16:115). We are forbidden to slay any other human being.
The Quran says :
"...if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for
spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew
the whole people: " (Quran 5:32)
I have NEVER come across Ali Sina quoting this verse of
the Quran. Maybe he has quoted somewhere I don’t know.
Until now I have NOT come across any article on his site
which has quoted this verse.
The Quran besides forbidding us from unlawful meats. It
also tells us which meats are permitted.
"O ye who believe! fulfil (all) obligations. Lawful unto you
(for food) are all four-footed animals, with the exceptions
named:" (Quran 5:1)
We are only allowed to have four-footed cattles except the
ones which are prohibited and we get the know the
prohibited foods from the Quran as well as from the
authentic sayings of our beloved Prophet Muhammad
(pbuh).
Human flesh is not permitted to have. It is so absurd even
when someone says that Islam allows people to have
human flesh.
The Test of the Bible
Regarding the verses of the Bible Mark 16:17-18
Ali Sina considers these verses to be figurative.
We may first ask. Why is Ali Sina defending the Bible
here?? .This test was for Dr.William Campbell not for Ali
Sina. Ali Sina then talks about some amazing feats
performed by people which sound impossible. What is Ali
Sina trying to prove by this? Is he justifying the bible by
putting forth lame arguments? Lets read those verses
from Mark 16.
"[16] He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but
he that believeth not shall be damned.
[17] And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my
name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new
tongues;
[18] They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any
deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands
on the sick, and they shall recover ."
Does one need any explanation for these verses? They are
in pure simple English of King James Version. Christians
today to claim that they cast out demons in the name of
Jesus and they heal people in the name of Jesus (In reality
its fraud.) They try to deceive people in public but they
will NEVER do such a thing in hospital). So this is obviously
not figurative speech.
Authenticity of these verses :
These verses are considered to be fabrication by revisers
of RSV (Revised Standard version). They threw them out
of the bible in 1952 but were put back again in 1971.
Ali Sina then brings verses of the Qur'an like 2:65,5:60 and
7:166 which say that the Jews (A group of them) were
turned into apes.
We Muslims consider this to be a miracle. It may sound
ridiculous to critics. This is attributed to Allah (SWT). He is
the creator of the heavens and the earth. It is not difficult
for him to do such a thing. Now the question may arise
that why do Muslims point absurdities in the bible??
The reason is that the things mentioned in the bible that
are absurd, most of them are attributed to common
people. They are not attributed to God. If one attributes
such things to God, we do not take exception to that.
Miracles are attributed to Allah. The Quran tells its reader
in the beginning only.
"1. A.L.M.
2. This is the Book; in it is guidance sure, without doubt, to
those who fear Allah.
3. Who believe in the UNSEEN , are steadfast in prayer,
and spend out of what We have provided for them;
" (Quran 2:1-3)
The Quran doesn't say that a believer can do these things
in the name of Allah. Allah himself did it as a punishment
from him.
This explanation is replies all so-called “ridiculous” claims.
Speaking Tongues
I believe I responded to this above. When the bible tells us
that they will do it in the name of Jesus it means they will
do it miraculously as Christians claim of performing many
other miracles in his name. Ali Sina is so desperate to
attack the Quran, he does not even mind saying something
to defend the bible. Anyone who has to a foreign land
needs to know the language to communicate with people.
It doesn't make him a True Christian believer. THe test
above is to check whether the person is a true believer or
not.
Unscientific Statements in Bible and Quran
Ali Sina Writes:
(Ali Sina) Yes the Bible is full of unscientific statements.
But is the Quran without them? Dr. Naik is engaging in the
favorite Islamic fallacy of tu quoque and instead of refuting
the charges brought against the Quran, he is trying to find
faults in the Bible. Tu quoque, or the “you too” argument is
a logical fallacy. If the Bible is proven unscientific, it does
not mean that the Quran is scientific.
My Response:
It was Dr.William Campbell who initiated the debate and
not Dr.Zakir Naik. Dr.Naik doesn't go around asking
people to debate him. In all these years he has had very
few public debates. It was Dr.Campbell who wrote a book
against Islam. Dr.Naik refuted the points on the Quran and
turned the tables against him.
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) In the field of medicine, the Bible says in the
book of Leviticus, Ch. No.14, Verse No.49 to 53 - it gives a
novel way for disinfecting a house from plague of
leprosy… disinfecting a house from plague of leprosy. It
says that… ‘Take two birds, kill one bird, take wood, scale
it - and the other living bird, dip it in water… and under
running water - later on sprinkle the house 7 times with
it.
Sprinkle the house with blood to disinfect against plague
of leprosy? You know blood is a good media of germs,
bacteria, as well as toxin - I hope Dr. William Campbell
does not use this method of disinfecting the OT, the
operation theatre.
(Ali Sina) Yes this is quite silly.
My Response:
See how Ali Sina is reminding people over and over that
bible silly and unscientific with errors. Answeringislam
team still puts him on their site. They too are pathetic and
desperate to attack Islam like Ali Sina.
Ali Sina Writes:
4:43 “… If ye are ill, or on a journey, or one of you cometh
from offices of nature, or ye have been in contact with
women, and ye find no water, then take for yourselves
clean sand or earth, and rub therewith your faces and
hands. For Allah doth blot out sins and forgive again and
again.”
How scientific is this? I’d like to ask Dr. Naik, if by accident
he falls into a cesspool and does not find water to clean
himself, will he become clean if he rubs his hand and face
with clean dirt? There is nothing scientific in this ritual. If
the instruction was to rub the soiled part with clean dirt
this would have made some sense, but how can one
become clean by rubbing his hands and face with dirt
when another part of his body is soiled?
My Response:
Ali Sina again lacks basic knowledge of Islam. If someone
falls in a cesspool he has to wash himself from head to toe
before he can offer his Prayers. The Quran in above verse
is talking about Tayummum . Suppose if I go to answer the
call of nature and after few minutes I have to offer my
Prayers. Its obligatory to do Wudu (Ablutions) before
Prayers (Quran 5:6). Suppose if I find no water for that, I
can take clean sand and rub my face and hands with it
instead.
Wudu (ablutions) are not for merely physical cleanliness
but for purification. If Ali Sina does not know basic things
of Islam that does not mean Quran is wrong. Lets read the
full verse here.
"O ye who believe! Approach not prayers with a mind
befogged, until ye can understand all that ye say,- nor in a
state of ceremonial impurity (Except when travelling on
the road), until after washing your whole body. If ye are
ill, or on a journey, or one of you cometh from offices of
nature, or ye have been in contact with women, and ye
find no water, then take for yourselves clean sand or
earth, and rub therewith your faces and hands. For Allah
doth blot out sins and forgive again and again." (Quran
4:43)
Ali Sina does not mind misquoting the verses of the Quran.
If this was by mistake then its inexcusable and if its
deliberate then its devilish.
The Quran tells us real clear that if one is in a state of
ceremonial impurity he has to wash his whole body.
Ali Sina Writes:
A claim of Muhammad about Jesus that is utterly
ridiculous and not even in the Bible is the verse 5:110
where Allah say to Jesus “behold! thou makest out of clay,
as it were, the figure of a bird, by My leave, and thou
breathest into it and it becometh a bird by My leave.” Is
this scientific? Why Muhammad could not perform
miracles like that?
My Response:
Ali Sina here is comparing miracles with science. He is
comparing apples and oranges. Why Muhammad (pbuH)
couldn't perform those miracles?? Hilarious indeed. This
is a typical question which was even asked by the pagan
Arabs. Such questions by Ali Sina suggest that he is a fake
apostate along with that it also shows his pagan mentality.
Such questions were even asked by pagan Arabs. The
Quran says
"They say: "Why is not a sign sent down to him from his
Lord?" Say: "The Unseen is only for Allah (to know), then
wait ye: I too will wait with you." (Quran 10:20)
"And We refrain from sending the signs, only because the
men of former generations treated them as false:" (Quran
17:59)
"They swear their strongest oaths by Allah, that if a
(special) sign came to them, by it they would believe. Say:
"Certainly (all) signs are in the power of Allah. but what
will make you (Muslims) realise that (even) if (special)
signs came, they will not believe.?" (Quran 6:109)
Ali Sina Writes:
Bukhari 4:54:537
The Prophet said "If a house fly falls in the drink of anyone
of you, he should dip it (in the drink), for one of its wings
has a disease and the other has the cure for the disease."
Does Dr. Naik practice this kind of medicine for himself
and his loved ones? God knows how many people must
have become sick and died during these centuries by
foolishly following the prescriptions of Dr. Muhammad bin
Abdullah.
Response :
note: The debate was not about the Hadith. It was only on
the Quran and the Bible. But anyways I’ll reply on that
even.
Ali Sina Writes:
Bukhari 7:71:590 says that Muhammad prescribed the
urine of camel as medicine. Is there any scientific proof
that drinking the urine of camel is beneficial? Urine is the
concentrated toxin and refuses of the body. How can this
utterly unhygienic thing be medicinal? Does Dr. Naik
follow his beloved prophet’s instruction for his own health
and longevity? Beer is prohibited in Islam, why not bottled
camel urine served chilled for Muslims? The world’s
dependency on oil is going to end within a few decades.
Bottled camel urine exported to all Muslim countries could
be a good source of income for Saudi Arabia. .
Response :
Ali Sina is here going crazy. This simply reveals how sick
and demented person Ali Sina is. The detailed reply on
camel urine used as medicine.
Ali Sina Writes:
According to the Islamic law, the a'yan najisah are nine in
number. They are as follows:
1. urine;
2. stool;
3. semen;
4. blood;
5. corpses;
6. dogs;
7. pigs;
8. kafir;
9. Alcoholic liquids.
Source: http://www.imamreza.net/eng/imamreza.php?
print=4759
9:28 says "Verily, the Mushrikûn (unbeleivers) are Najasun
(unclean). Is this scientific? How can one become unclean
by just discovering some errors in Islam and deciding not
to believe in it? And how can a kafir who is unclean
become clean simply by saying his shahada ? This is not
scientific. It is hocus-pocus.
My Response:
This is metaphorical as well as literal. Muslims are obliged
to be in the state of ablution. Non-Muslims are not in that
state therefore they are called as unclean.
Ali Sina Writes:
Does Dr. Naik believe that alcohol is unclean? Alcohol is
used to disinfect things that are unclean. Did he use camel
urine to disinfect his instruments instead of alcohol, when
he was practicing medicine? How can alcohol be
considered unclean? You can say drinking it is unhealthy,
but certainly it is not unclean. This is as absurd as using
bird blood as disinfectant.
My Response:
Point to be noted, nowhere does the Quran or any Sahih
Hadith call alcohol "najis." Since Islam bans consumption
of intoxications in Toto. Therefore some scholars consider
it to be najis. The Quran tells us very clearly.
"They ask thee concerning wine and gambling. Say: "In
them is great sin, and SOME PROFIT , for men; but the sin
is greater than the profit." (Quran 2:219)
It is unclean only in metaphorical sense. No Quranic verse
or Hadith calls it najis
In Response to Numbers 5:11-31.
Ali Sina Writes:
He completely ignored that the Quran contains far more
ridiculous statements. Take for example the verse 3.61
“If any one disputes in this matter with thee, now after
(full) knowledge Hath come to thee, say: "Come! let us
gather together,- our sons and your sons, our women and
your women, ourselves and yourselves: Then let us
earnestly pray, and invoke the curse of Allah on those who
lie!"
Here Muhammad is challenging his opponents to engage
in a “cursing contest" to see who is telling the truth. This is
really funny. How can truth be revealed through cursing
and invoking Allah’s wrath on each other? This shows the
prophet of Islam was superstitious and a fool. He was
indeed a very stupid man. Does cursing work? If it does
why Muhammad asked his followers to wage war for him
and kill innocent people? All they had to do was sit at
home and curse their enemies and wait for calamity to
strike them.
My Response:
The Jews considered themselves to be the righteous
servants of God and were rejecting Prophet Muhammad
(pbuh). No True Believer will invoke the curse of Allah
upon him. Its not a "contest" as Ali Sina describes. No one
was getting a prize for cursing more. Invoking the curse of
Allah does reveal the truth in many cases. I have
witnessed many such cases. In most of the cases, the Truth
gets revealed. Anyone who is even little God fearing will
not invoke the curse of God upon him.
Muhammad (pbuh) never asked to kill any innocent
human beings. This is the same lie which critics use
against him.
For refutations on false charges against Muhammad
(pbuh) refer to :
http://www.answering-christianity.com/ac4.htm#links

Emusan:

Now you said everyone knows that Campbell performed woefully. If Dr. Campbell performed woefully, does it mean that ALL the POINT raised by Dr. Zakir are valid?

The reason why I didn't subscribe to Ali Sina reply is because he's a FREETHINKER and ONLY try to reiterate with the point that ALL CHALLENGES raised by Dr. Zakir can also be used against Quran.....though he's right.....Remember my first statement in my first post.

But for you to say you can't find it on CHRISTIAN SITE is a pure lie, here is the rebuttal.

http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Naik/index.htm

I GUESS U DIDNT READ WHAT IS THERE I HAVE ALREADY VISITED THAT LINK EVEN BEFORE U POST IT FOR ME THE RESPONSE THERE IS NOT BY THE ANTAGONIST IT IS BY UR CHRISTIAN MATE PLS CHECK IT WELL AS I HAVE ALWAYS SAID CONFIRM BEFORE POSTING SMH!

I wanted to modify my post before by adding CHRISTIAN/FREETHINKER but network is bad.
Since you've quote my post I don't need to do that again.

Abdulsalam20: I GUESS U DIDNT READ WHAT IS THERE I HAVE ALREADY VISITED THAT LINK EVEN BEFORE U POST IT FOR ME

And you said no Christian respond to Zakir's challenge.

THE RESPONSE THERE IS NOT BY THE ANTAGONIST IT IS BY UR CHRISTIAN MATE PLS CHECK IT WELL

Are you sure something is up there?
You claimed NO CHRISTIAN site! And I went ahead to give you where A CHRISTIAN site responded to the challenge and you're here falling another thing.

AS I HAVE ALWAYS SAID CONFIRM BEFORE POSTING SMH!

Your problem is that you didn't read all the reply of Ali Sina you probably read his reply through Zakir's respond to his post because had it been you read it you will understand what I'm saying by calling him Christian/Freethinker. He is a Christian but also believed is freethinker that's why if your open his SITE you'll see "WE DEAL WITH HATE, NOT FAITH"

I bet it you will go back and check because you didn't know before.

Though some Christians still welcome him but I'm not subscribe with him.

Emusan: I wanted to modify my post before by adding CHRISTIAN/FREETHINKER but network is bad.
Since you've quote my post I don't need to do that again.



And you said no Christian respond to Zakir's challenge.



Are you sure something is up there?
You claimed NO CHRISTIAN site! And I went ahead to give you where A CHRISTIAN site responded to the challenge and you're here falling another thing.



Your problem is that you didn't read all the reply of Ali Sina you probably read his reply through Zakir's respond to his post because had it been you read it you will understand what I'm saying by calling him Christian/Freethinker. He is a Christian but also believed is freethinker that's why if your open his SITE you'll see "WE DEAL WITH HATE, NOT FAITH"

I bet it you will go back and check because you didn't know before.

Though some Christians still welcome him but I'm not subscribe with him.

WHY MISQUOTING ME?.......U ARE FUNNY MAN WHAT I SAID IS THAT U CANT SEE THE REAL COMMENT OF THE ANTAGONIST OF ZAKRNAIK I MEAN THE CO DEBATER UNLESS U WATCH THE VIDEO AND U WENT AHEAD TO POST A LINK AND THE LINK U POSTED IS A LINK CONTAINING ZAKR NAIK CLAIM WHICH WAS ANSWERED BY UR CO CHRISTIAN SO U CAN SEE U'RE ACTUALLY CNFUSE IN THE REAL SENSE...............U ALSO SAID ALI SINA IS A CHRISTIAN/FREE THINKER SMH!............ATLEAST HE IS THE ONLY CHRISTIAN WHO TRY TO COUNTER ZAKR NAIK BY FORWARDING THE MSG TO HIM AND HE WAS ALSO BUSTED JUST LYK D ANTAGONIST ..........

Ali Sina (pseudonym) is an Iranian Ex-Muslim ( apostate )
and a strong critic of Islam . Founder of Faith Freedom
International, which he describes as a grassroots movement
of ex-Muslims. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]
Background
Born and raised in Iran, educated in Italy and Pakistan, and
now living in Canada, he began debating with people in the
1990s