Again, please, for time being, can we focus on the verse, and the verse alone.
I take that back. The links are relevant.
Apologies, Grey.
… So… why is the .89157 involved? It’s the cosine of @, where @ is… what? Gravity doesn’t bend light noticably, expecially not that much.
I find this type of discussions interesting to follow, because most of the time have no idea where the proof for scientific information in Al Qur’an is based on.
Read: I’m not a scientist so I really have no means to verify if those claims are correct or wrong.
Some of them however make me think because the evidence given is even for me clear and understandable.
Yet this isn’t the case in this example. I have already a headache from reading the OP 
As for the question in the title of this topic:
Muslims consider Al Qur’an to be the Message of God transmitted by the archangel Gabriel to Muhammed in the Arabic language.
Which is also noticed in Al Qur’an itself, although the interpretation of that particular verse is debatable (as everything is debatable when humans interprete a text.)
The remark that God transcendents languages holds no ground. The language of Muhammed was used to transmit the Message of God to a man who (probably) only understood that language.
If I start writing here in an other language then English, I doubt that English languaged people will get the message.
Salaam. A
Okay: Also there is mention of “through the whole universe”. That means that the verse claims that “the whole universe” is a mere 1,000 light years across.
Dogface:
I have to correct you here:
There is no mentioning of “through the whole universe” in that particular verse.
Salaam. A
Alpha is the angle swept out by the earth/moon system each lunar month.
Now being the Dr. of Physics that this gentleman is, he’s conveniently forgotten that nasty Kepler and his laws. Equal areas in equal times. Meaning that the earth/moon system moves faster close in and slower far out.
Basically the angle swept out per lunar moth is not constant.
Bet he gets paid better than me too.
Hey. Sorry I’m getting into this late, and I know my post isn’t particularly timely, but…
rjung-- you quibble that some bible fundamentalists say the universe is only 6000 years old. By the count I follow, it’s 5763 years old. This is also the contention of the hebrew calendar. This only works for creationalists, but for the creationalists:
- Before the sun was created, the word “day” must have had a different meaning, consireding our day is determined by solar factors. This probably does screwy things to our modern concept of time.
- If the earth is a product of creation, then there is no need for the earth to have been created in infancy. Think of the wasste of time! If the world could just be created, then there is no reason for it not to have been created fully formed, at a stage when scientific dating methods would put it at millions of years old. If the world was created pre-evolved, there’s no reason for the number 5763 to be inaccurate.
Aldebaran in the slide package it says
which can read as heaven to earth taking 1000 light years. Which actually means the universe would be 2000 light years across.
Actually it implies that you’ve got 1000 years before God “sees” you doing bad stuff. Wait for the end times and then go nuts.
i don’t think you understood me correctly.
let’s say ‘the message of god’ originated from a ‘thought of god’ – that is to say the message of god was transmitted to communicate the ultimate reality that god embodies. language can only ‘represent’ this ultimate reality, and ambiguously at that.
if language could perfectly transmit the will of god, we wouldn’t be arguing over interpretation and meaning. it would be clear to all, unambiguous, beyond dispute.
clearly not the case.
The creationists have already demonstrated that they understand science the way a goldfish understands the Mona Lisa. Just the words “dinosaur fossils” alone are enough to send them into tailspins of illogic and bunk that have been disproven and contradicted by scientists in a dozen fields, time and time again.
Not at all.
And the translation given isn’t a good and correct one either.
I would translate as:
"He arranges the management from out of heaven to the earth and then it comes back to Him in a day from which the mesure is according your calculation thousand years. "
Sheich Si Hamza Boubakeur translates in French as:
“Il décide, dans le ciel, du sort de toute chose sur terre, puis tout remonte vers Lui en un jour dont la durée es de mille ans selon votre calcul.”
Which can be translated in English as:
“He decides, in heaven, about the fate of everything on earth, and then it ascends back to Him in a day from which the duration is thousand years in your calculations.”
The verse used so lightly here is in fact one of those that posed and still poses the greatest embarasments for exegeses.
Only Al Jassa Ahmed-r-Rahzi (hanafite school) , with much precautions and turning to the all known “but God knows best” gives the following explication (I’ll try to translate in understandable English):
“His order comes down from heaven towards His earthly creatures and the good deeds of these earthly creatures ascend back to Him in conformity with His decisions.”
(Rahzi XXV, 172 “free” translation by me)
Tabari pharaphrasing the verse (without giving further clarification) concludes with the same precautions as Rahzi that it is " at least the most apparent idea for explanation".
You’ll notice that there is nowhere said where exactly this “heaven” is or where God is in that heaven or if you want: space in its whole.
And since God is transcendent, the whole idea of even giving Him a “place” in “heaven” is in opposition with the understanding that He is transcendent, non created = not a being but God.
Salaam. A
It can’t be the case since language is a limited way of expression of the limited creations of God.
Even when God would transmit His message via thoughts, these thoughts would by us be translated into the limited language we use to think and express ourselves in.
What happens when you dream, for example? You see pictures and maybe hear voices… Yet you can’t describe and even vision them otherwise then with by using limited means you as a human posses: language, drawing, signs, produced by your limited human memory that recals what you saw and/or heard.
So every form of transmitting God’s message shall be limited in nature because of the limitations of humans themselves.
If you would fully understand and know this message, you would be God.
Salaam. A
Well the translation is the responsibility of the writer/translator. You can hardly fault the audience for reading the information as presented.
You would agree with that, would you not?
The location of God holds no interest to me at all.
Grey,
It holds your interest in such that you take it as a fixed position during this debate here.
Salaam. A
I’m still waiting for you to admit the translation issue (if there is one) is with the author/translator and not the reader.
And there is no debate here. The math is wrong, the translation is suspect and the result is useless in the context of establishing supposedly special knowledge embedded in the Qur’an.
The author takes it as a fixed position; I can hardly be faulted for dealing with his presented “facts”.
this “limited” business is a red herring.
my comments didn’t have anything to do with infinite vs limited, but if you must, language can’t perfectly describe a limited set either.
how can one claim that a text is the perfect word of god when faiths fracture and branch so often over questions of meaning and interpretation?
So… To earth and BACK in 1000 years?
Cool! 500 lyr radius universe, we really could colonize the place. 
No problem. I got the feeling we were talking past each other near the end.