Relation Between Science and Religion

[Al-Indunisiy]

:salam2:
Since I first read or watch videos/articles/books about the scientific miracles of the Quran I had thoughts going on about the relation between science and religion.

My perception is that we must be careful when associating some aspcts of the Qur'an with scientific discoveries. That is because of the different nature of science and the Qur'an.

Science is always subject to change by the influence of human progress and world view. Example: the change between flat-world to round-earth view. But, Islam and thus the Qur'an will never change.

Thus by associating some aspects of the Qur'an with scientific discoveries we put some claims of miracle subject to scientific progress.

But maybe except some miracle claims would be spared because the nature of the scientific discoveries is indisputable. Example: human embryology.

Okay, if anyone have any other views or comment(maybe point some weakness in my views) please reply.

 

[mhamzah]

:salam2:

I agree with your statement but those who speak about Quran and science do make a distinction between established fact and theories. Dr. Maurice Bucaille (The Bible, The Qur'an and Science) was the first one to write about this topic in detail and in his book he did make the distinction and the trend has continued.

Let me quote from his book:

This last comment calls for the following observation: a distinction must be drawn between scientific theory and duly controlled observed fact. Theory is intended to explain a phenomenon or a series of phenomena not readily understandable. In many instances theory changes: it is liable to be modified or replaced by another theory when scientific progress makes it easier to analyse facts and invisage a more viable explanation. On the other hand, an observed fact checked by experimentation is not liable to modification: it becomes easier to define its characteristics, but it remains the same. It has been established that the Earth revolves around the Sun and the Moon around the Earth, and this fact will not be subject to revision; all that may be done in the future is to define the orbits more clearly.

A regard for the changing nature of theory is, for example, what made me reject a verse from the Qur'an thought by a Muslim physicist to predict the concept of anti-matter, a theory which is at present the subject of much debate. One can, on the other hand. quite legitimately devote great attention to a verse from the Qur'an describing the aquatic origins of life, a phenomenon we shall never be able to verify, but which has many arguments that speak in its favour. As for observed facts such as the evolution of the human embryo, it is quite possible to confront different stages described in the Qur'an with the data of modern embryology and find complete concordance between modern science and the verses of the Qur'an referring to this subject.


http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/MB_BQS/14quran.htm

Quran and Modern science by Zakir Naik: (Page 5)

The Qur’an is not a book of Science but a book of ‘Signs’, i.e. Aayaats. There are more than six thousand ‘Signs’ in the Qur’an of which more than a thousand deal with hard core Science.

We all know that many a times Science takes a ‘U-turn’. In this book I have considered only established scientific facts and not hypotheses and theories based on mere assumptions and not backed by proof.