asgardhaven

I think its probably safe to say that Islam like many religions of the past reflected the world within which they were established. In almost all cases violence was a part of that world. Add to that the fact that any new faith is going to challange some established power base and therefore engender some sort of backlash upto and including outright persecution, its not unsuprising that the faithful of what ever diety can be a bit militant.

In Islam's case graft that on top of traditional tribal cultures (think the Burka of Afganistan). Then throw on top of that a huge blow to there sense of identity and material culture through invasions by Mongol, Crusader, and European Colonizers. Islam is in part so strident and fundamentalist in large part because Muslims feel themselves to be a people on the ropes and under the thumbs of the oppressor.

Give the people material prosperity and political freedom and I'd put good money that the fundamentalism would recede and moderates more and more dominate that faith.

asgardhaven

As far as which is more or less friendly to science I think your actually looking at acciddents of geography and the ebb and flow of history. For example the early Islamic states inherited many of the ancient repositories of knowledge(Egyptian, Greek, Persian, etc.) and centers of continuously existing cultural centers. They had stable and prosperous enough societies to produce citizens with enough free time and resources to pursue knowledge for both its own sake and pratical benefit. They also had a relatively tolerant culture for th etime which allowed non-Muslims to live and work in their borders (albeit with a second class citizenship) in similar pursuits. They also sat astride many of the important trade routes that ensured both a source of wealth and a source of information.

Eventually these advantages were eroded for variuos political and social reasons(invasions, the opening of the Americas, movement of the trade routes to Asia from overland to asea around Africa, the Renisance in Europe, the more interstate competive environment in Europe that drove advances in Europe both to advance personal wealth and ensure states defence, etc.)

SignOfTheCross

It is no more "pro-science" than Catholicism, get real!

As much as I know, the big bang theory and evolution are not Islamic doctrines.

Peace,
SOTC

Asha'man

Islam used to be pro-science.

Ever notice that most stars in the sky have Arabic names? The Islamic/Arab world was a great leader in the early days of real astronomy (as opposed to astrology).

However, not any more. The more they studied, the less it confirmed their view of the world. The real world started to actually contradict the Koran, and that wasn't acceptable.

So they stopped studying astronomy.

River

Well, this Muslim sheikh is not Erudite.

River

They very well may be.

River

The real world doesnt contradict Quranic astrononomy.



Asgardhaven provided a more accurate portrayal of Islam's decline.

River

The Big Bang Theory is explicitly stated in the Qur'an . Evolution is implicitly stated in the Qur'an.

River

"
He [Dhu’l-Qarnayn] followed, until he reached the setting of the sun. He found it set in a spring of murky water. (18:85-6)

Does it not imply that the earth is flat and be considered a scientific mistake?

Answer: The problem seems to have arisen due to an erroneous translation of the said verses. A correct translation is:
He [Dhu’l-Qarnayn] made ready his resources, until he reached the place where the sun sets. He found it as if it was setting in a spring of murky water. (18:85-6)

The setting of the sun in murky waters is a figurative portrayal. When one is standing on the shores where the sun sets, the scene is very much like what the verse says. It seems as if the sun is setting in murky waters. The style adopted by the Qur’an indicates that Dhu’l-Qarnayn had conquered all the known parts of the West at that time. He had reached the end of the known land territory and now only the expanse of water remained beyond it. It must be appreciated that the language of the Qur’an is highly literary and it often employs figurative styles and constructions to convey its meanings. If one does not have a literary taste, he fails to grasp the delicacy and elegance of such
styles. "http://www.renaissance.com.pk/novquer2y1.html


Qu'ran definitely has some sort of metaphorical component or spin-off groups such as Bahaii and Sikh beliefs couldnt have formed , since they were derived mainly of the metaphorical side of Islam. Well anyways....

This should have been pretty obvious from the other Quranic verse that said that the Day merged into the night.... ( without taking exceptions to consideration, since everything has exceptions). There is no talk about the sun merging into a body of water. We tend to forget that the arabs of 1400 years ago were not primitive . They were not cavemen. They had navigation systems and ways of following the stars. Islam relies heavily on mathematics. We have 5 appointed prayers a day . We utilise the lunar calendar . And have compasses to map out the Qibla ( direction) of Mecca. The arabs were never that dumb that they would think the sun would melt into the water. uhmmm. And if the Prophet said something that dumb...Islam would have been rejected point blank. Well to show you how sophisticated
the Quran is take a look at the following verse:


[THE SUN WILL EXTINGUISH AFTER A CERTAIN PERIOD]

"And the Sun Runs its course For a period determined For it;
that is The decree of (Him) The exalted in Might, The All-Knowing."
[AI-Qur'an 36:38]*

Asha'man

If the Big Bang Theory was so explicitly stated, how come nobody knew about it until this century?

I think you are reading much more into the text than is actually there.