Quranic Inerrancy – Religion Refuted

Muslims, no less than Christians, fancy that their holy book is inerrant. Zakir Naik, a conservative Muslim scholar, declares that the Quran is never to be critiqued. He demands that non-Muslim houses of worship be forbidden in Muslim lands and that Muslims who convert from Islam and then speak against Islam be put to death.[1]⁺

If a book is inerrant, why is so much effort invested in silencing or killing its critics? Someone should call Naik aside and say, “Listen, buttercup, you need to calm down.”

Naik boasts that the Quran (meaning “recitation”), probably written shortly after 632 CE, expresses scientific concepts that mankind didn’t discover until much later. I will devote the remainder of this chapter to exposing this idle boast for the sham that it is.

Item number 1. According to Naik, the Quran describes the Big Bang in verse 21:30, which says, “Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?”[2]⁺

Naik is oblivious to the Quran’s view—common to Abrahamic, ancient Mesopotamian, and Egyptian religions—that Earth and sky, both solid, were split by a god. Similar ideas appear first in Babylonian creation myths recounted in the Enuma Elish (nicknamed the “Babylonian Genesis” and probably written during the twelfth century BCE), in which the supreme god Marduk split the body of the vanquished Tiamat to create heaven and Earth and to separate the waters above from the waters below.[3]⁺

All these religious fables consist of magical stuff, nothing like the modern cosmological view. I have perused the Quran and found no mention of red shifts or cosmic background radiation. If the Quran were going to dabble in scientific discussions of the Big Bang, then certainly it should have mentioned the Hubble constant. Muslims and Christians alike used to denounce the Big Bang as a dastardly atheistic ploy. Now they scramble to show how their holy books described the Big Bang centuries before science discovered it.

Item number 2. According to Naik, the Quran says the moon reflects sunlight rather than being an original source of light, whereas scientists discovered a mere one hundred to two hundred years ago that the moon doesn’t produce its own light.

Naik’s account is false. Aristotle argued that Earth was spherical based on observations of Earth’s shadow on the moon. He understood that no shadow would be detected if the moon were the source of its own light. By the time the Quran was written, it had been known for nearly a thousand years that the moon reflects sunlight.

Naik cited verse 25:61, “Blessed is He Who made constellations in the skies, and placed therein a Lamp and a Moon giving light.”[4] That could be read to indicate either that the moon generates light or reflects light. As we stretch that verse to fit Naik’s claim, we can’t help but wonder why supposedly all-knowing beings struggle to communicate in clear, unambiguous terms. Gods tend to talk to their followers using metaphor, poetic language, secret codes, signs, and parables. I don’t want to be insulting, but from what I have seen of religious believers, these are the last people on Earth who should be expected to solve riddles.

Bill Nye (“The Science Guy”) was booed by a Waco, Texas, audience during McLennan Community College’s Distinguished Lecture Series after he commented that the moon reflects sunlight, contrary to Genesis 1:16, which states, “God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night” (NIV). Nye noted that the “lesser light” (the moon) is not a light at all.[5] Christians who booed weren’t disputing the science. They just didn’t appreciate someone pointing out that their inerrant text isn’t. Christians and Muslims should either learn to be more open to criticism or adopt books that are less open to criticism.

Item number 3. Naik, in his ongoing jihad against rationality, proclaimed that mankind first knew Earth was spherical when Francis Drake sailed around the globe in 1597.

False. Pythagoras (ca. 570–495 BCE) was, as far as we know, the first to recognize Earth as spherical. Aristotle agreed. In the middle of the second century, the Roman astronomer Claudius Ptolemy incorporated a spherical Earth into his Earth-centric model of the cosmos. The globist perspective, though ignored outside the intellectual class for nearly a millennium, never went extinct.

Naik subsequently amended his claim to say that, though individuals had speculated that Earth was spherical, it was not proven until the time of Drake. Sorry, wrong again. The Greek mathematician Eratosthenes (ca. 276–195 BCE), using perfectly valid measurement techniques, calculated Earth’s circumference to within 2 percent of the actual value.[6]⁺

During the centuries following Eratosthenes, intellectuals such as Macrobius Ambrosius Theodosius (a Neoplatonist pagan writing in Rome during the fifth century CE) adopted the spherical Earth model. Unfortunately, most of the Mediterranean region had fallen under control of the Catholic Church, which expressed little interest in the natural sciences. As explained by philosopher and sociologist Leone Montagnini, early Church leaders influenced by the Greeks readily accepted a globist view. Among these were Origen of Alexandria, Ambrose of Alexandria, and Basil of Caesarea. In contrast, the flat-Earth model persisted among Church leaders influenced more by Old Testament texts. These included Diodore of Tarsus, Severian of Gabala, John Crysostom, and Cosmas Indicopleustes.[7]

Augustine (354–430 CE), pushing the Rome–Christianity merger, wrote that it was plausible that Earth was spherical, but he remained noncommittal. He ultimately adopted a conservative stance and dismissed such matters: “There is another form of temptation, even more fraught with danger. This is the disease of curiosity . . . It is this that drives us to try and discover the secrets of nature, those secrets which are beyond our understanding, which can avail us nothing and which man should not wish to learn.”[8]

Medieval peasants, being illiterate, did not write down their opinions. They likely deferred to religious authorities. Topographia Christiana, written ca. 547 CE by the monk Cosmas Indicopleustes, defended the flat-Earth model against pagan spherical notions. Precisely when the majority of commoners shifted to a globist stance is uncertain, perhaps as early as the sixth century or as late as the end of the millennium. By the thirteenth century, though, texts written in vernacular language referred to Earth as a sphere.[9]⁺ The oldest surviving model of a globe, created by the German astronomer Martin Behaim, dates to the late fifteenth century. We therefore have good reason to doubt Naik’s claim that the flat-Earth perspective prevailed until Francis Drake’s 1597 sea voyage.

During the seventh century, when the Quran was written, acceptance of the flat-Earth model may have been common among ordinary people. But the Middle Eastern literati likely understood that Earth is spherical. Hence, the authors of the Quran had literary resources available to get the shape of Earth right—not that having such resources should matter, given that the Quran was purportedly written under direction of an all-knowing god.

Yet the Quran still got the shape of Earth wrong. Naik cites verse 79:30: “And the earth, moreover, hath He extended to a wide expanse.”[10] Put another way, Earth is wide because Allah stretched it. This is the familiar Old Testament flat-Earth perspective.[11]⁺

Since Naik likes to interpret passages poetically, maybe he can interpret this passage about the extending or stretching of Earth to mean that the Rocky Mountains are stretch marks. Unfortunately, Muhammad never mentioned the Rocky Mountains. He didn’t seem to know anything about the American continents, isotopes, chloroplasts, or kangaroos. He knew only about sand and camels and other stuff common in the seventh-century Middle East. That’s hardly surprising since Muhammad was allegedly a camel merchant, the seventh-century equivalent of a used-car salesman.[12]⁺

Item number 4. Naik brags that verse 51:47 describes the expansion of the universe: “With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of space.”[13]

Naik strikes out again. The Quran refers to the firmament, expressing the same flat-Earth perspective as the Old Testament, as affirmed by Quran 22:65: “He holds up the sky lest it falls on earth.”[14] The part of Naik’s passage mentioning “space” refers to the expansive Earthly terrain enclosed by the solid firmament. But even if it referred to outer space, the passage speaks only of the “vastness” of space, providing no hint that our universe is expanding.

Item number 5. Naik claims that the Quran presaged the scientific principle that mountains prevent Earth from shaking. Unfortunately for Naik’s argument, there is no such scientific principle. Mountains do not prevent Earth from shaking. To the contrary, plate tectonics create mountains and cause earthquakes. To suggest that mountains prevent Earth from shaking is ludicrous. Naik cites verses 78:6–7, which say, “Have We not made the earth a resting place? And the mountains as stakes?”[15] The verses that Naik cites do not establish that mountains keep Earth from shaking.

I have critiqued enough of Naik’s empty boasts to illustrate that the Quran is not an inerrant book. There is no inerrant book (not even the book you are reading now).[16]⁺

It might be tempting to shrug and say, “Well, if someone wants to fool themselves into thinking their holy book is inerrant, that’s their business.” It is their business, certainly, but we should not be so nonchalant. The whole idea of inerrancy arises from the wish to shut down debate. It reflects the yearning to silence one’s opposition rather than engage with them as equals in intelligent discussion.

Those claiming inerrancy are alerting everyone around them that they have no appetite for contrary evidence. To preemptively dismiss the judgment of others in such a manner is to disrespect not only their opinions, but also all the time and effort they invested in researching those opinions. It devalues intellectual integrity and debases the pursuit of truth.

We need to acknowledge the real danger we face. Claims of inerrancy pose an existential threat to any discursive and democratic civilization founded on the principles of open debate.

[1] Killing apostates is mandated in the collection of Muhammed’s sayings and practices known as the Hadith (Sahih al-Bukhari 4:52:260 and elsewhere). Sunni scholar Yusuf al-Qaradawi, head of the Muslim Brotherhood, said on Egyptian television, “If they [prior Muslim leaders] had gotten rid of the punishment for apostasy, Islam would not exist today.”

Quotation Source: Nonie Darwish, “If They [Muslims] Had Gotten Rid of the Punishment for Apostasy, Islam Would Not Exist Today,” Gatestone Institute, February 5, 2013, http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3572/islam-apostasy-death.

[2] Abdullah Yusuf Ali, trans., The Holy Qur’an Text, Translation and Commentary (Singapore: The Muslim Converts’ Association, 1946).

You may wonder why Allah uses the plural “we” instead of “I.” According to Muslims, the plural is not a holdover from polytheism. Rather, “The term ‘We’ in the Bible and in the Quran is the royal ‘We’ – as an example when the king says, ‘We decree the following . . .’ ”

“Why Does Quran Say ‘We & He’?” GodAllah.com, https://www.godallah.com/we_and_he.php.

[3] The book of Genesis and the Enuma Elish share many commonalities: (1) In both stories, God brings order and light to chaos and darkness. (2) In the Enuma Elish, the symbol of chaos is the sea goddess Tiamat, while Genesis refers to the “deep” using the Hebrew word tehom, which is linguistically related to Tiamat. (3) In both stories, light exists before the creation of the sun, moon, and stars. (4) There is also a division of the waters above from those below, with a barrier (firmament) holding back the upper waters. (5) The sequence of creation is similar, including the division of waters, creation of dry land, luminaries, and humanity, all followed by rest.

Pete Enns, “Genesis 1 and a Babylonian Creation Story,” BioLogos, May 18, 2010, https://biologos.org/articles/genesis-1-and-a-babylonian-creation-story.

[4] Abdullah Yusuf Ali, The Holy Qur’an Text, Translation and Commentary.

[5] Tim Woods, “Bill Nye ‘The Science Guy’ Is Entertaining and Provocative at MCC Lecture,” Wacotrib.com, April 06, 2006, Internet Archive, http://web.archive.org/web/20090427074510/http://www.wacotrib.com/news/content/news/stories/2006/04/06/04062006wacbillnye.html?.

[6] Within 16 percent in the unlikely event that he used the Egyptian rather than Greek stadion as his unit of measure.

[7] Leone Montagnini, “La questione della forma della Terra. Dalle origini alla tarda Antichità, in Studi sull’Oriente Cristiano,” 13/II: 31–68.

Post navigation

Leave a Reply Cancel reply