Saudi Cleric Claims: The Sun Revolves Around the Earth

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/178615#.Uyj_R1KPKzc

Saudi Cleric Claims: The Sun Revolves Around the Earth

Forget what you learned at school. A Saudi cleric recently said that the sun revolves around the Earth, citing the Koran as proof.


By Elad Benari
First Publish: 3/18/2014, 6:14 AM

We have all been taught at school that the Earth revolves around the sun, but, according to a senior Saudi cleric, we’ve been misled.

In fact, Saleh Al-Fawzan, a member of the Saudi Council of Senior Scholars, recently claimed in a televised interview that not only does the Earth not revolve around the sun, the opposite is true.

Al-Fawzan’s proof for his claim that the sun revolved around the Earth is none other than the Koran. The interview aired on Saudi Channel 1 and was translated by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI).




In the interview, the host asks Al-Fawzan, “Allah says in a Koranic verse: ‘And the sun runs towards its stopping point. That is the determination of the All-Powerful, the All-Knowing.’ Does the sun revolve around the earth?”

Saleh Al-Fawzan replies by saying, “There is no doubt about it. The Koran says: ‘The sun runs…’ Nevertheless, they say that the sun stands in place and the Earth moves. This contradicts the Koran.”

“Ignoring the Koran and adopting modern theories is not something a Muslim can do. A Muslim must follow the Koran,” he adds.

In another recent science-related claim by Muslims, an Iranian cleric declared that famed Jewish scientist Albert Einstein was not Jewish at all.

In fact, said Ayatolla Mahadavi Kani, Einstein was a Shiite Muslim who converted to Islam and got the idea for his Theory of Relativity from Islam.

This is what we are up against, a people damn backward they believe this crap. -Tyr

[jafar00]

Here is a good example of Memri's editing being more obvious than usual. The video has been chopped to appear that the Sheikh said that the sun revolves around the Earth, when the Qur'aan doesn't say so. Despite the Qur'aan not being a science book, it does describe the sun and moon moving their own orbits.

It is He Who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon. Each of them is floating in its orbit. (21:33)

So the sun and the moon each have their own orbits. The moon around Earth and the sun around the galactic centre. The verb used "yasbahoona" describes both orbit and rotation of the sun and the moon independently of each other.

Now, it doesn't talk about who orbits whom. Just that each has an orbit of it's own.

By the sun and its heat and brightness,
and by the moon as it follows it;
and by the day as it displays the sun's glory,
and by the night as it envelopes the sun; (91:1-4)

Verses 3 and 4 say that the day reveals the sun and the Night hides it (not the other way round where the sun reveals the day and hides the night) clearly indicating that it is not the sun that is revolving but the earth system that is revolving. The sun is relatively (from our perspective) stationary, while the spin of the earth, hides and reveals the sun and causes the night and day.

Have you not seen how your Lord lengthens out the shadow? Had He willed, He would have made it constant, but We have made the sun its pilot (25:45)

If the Earth wasn't round or rotating, shadows would not lengthen. But you might say that means the sun is revolving around the Earth? Nay, but He also says the sun is it's pilot or guide (ie, gravitational force). This means the sun guides the Earth's orbit, not the other way around.

Memri has suggested that the Sheikh contradicted the Qur'aan.

This whole thing is nothing but Israeli lies. It's propaganda and you bought it.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Here is a good example of Memri's editing being more obvious than usual. The video has been chopped to appear that the Sheikh said that the sun revolves around the Earth, when the Qur'aan doesn't say so. Despite the Qur'aan not being a science book, it does describe the sun and moon moving their own orbits.

It is He Who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon. Each of them is floating in its orbit. (21:33)

So the sun and the moon each have their own orbits. The moon around Earth and the sun around the galactic centre. The verb used "yasbahoona" describes both orbit and rotation of the sun and the moon independently of each other.

Now, it doesn't talk about who orbits whom. Just that each has an orbit of it's own.

By the sun and its heat and brightness,
and by the moon as it follows it;
and by the day as it displays the sun's glory,
and by the night as it envelopes the sun; (91:1-4)

Verses 3 and 4 say that the day reveals the sun and the Night hides it (not the other way round where the sun reveals the day and hides the night) clearly indicating that it is not the sun that is revolving but the earth system that is revolving. The sun is relatively (from our perspective) stationary, while the spin of the earth, hides and reveals the sun and causes the night and day.

Have you not seen how your Lord lengthens out the shadow? Had He willed, He would have made it constant, but We have made the sun its pilot (25:45)

If the Earth wasn't round or rotating, shadows would not lengthen. But you might say that means the sun is revolving around the Earth? Nay, but He also says the sun is it's pilot or guide (ie, gravitational force). This means the sun guides the Earth's orbit, not the other way around.

Memri has suggested that the Sheikh contradicted the Qur'aan.

This whole thing is nothing but Israeli lies. It's propaganda and you bought it.

Criticized by his own, other Muslims , so do not give that its only just Jewish lies crap. -Tyr


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abd_al-Aziz_ibn_Baz

The number of books written by Ibn Bāz exceeds sixty and the subject matter covered many topics such as Hadith, Tafsir, Fara'ed, Tawheed, Fiqh and also a great deal of books on Salat, Zakat, Dawah, Hajj and Umrah.[8] He also authored a criticism of the concept of nationhood.[1][2]

Death[edit]

On Thursday morning, 13 May 1999, Ibn Bāz died at the age of 88. The next day, following Friday prayer, King Fahd bin Abdul Aziz, Crown Prince 'Abdullah bin 'Abdul 'Aziz, Sultan bin Abdulaziz, and hundreds of thousands of people performed the funeral prayer at the Masjid al-Haram in Mecca.[13] He was buried in Al Adl cemetery, Mecca.[14]

King Fahd issued a decree appointing Abdul-Azeez ibn Abdullaah Aal ash-Shaikh as the new Grand Mufti after Ibn Bāz's death.[15]

In his career as the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, he attempted to both legitimize the rule of the ruling family and to support calls for the reform of Islam in line with Salafi ideals. Many criticized him for supporting the Saudi government when, after the Gulf War, it muzzled or imprisoned those regarded as too critical of the government, such as Safar al-Hawali and Salman al-Ouda.

When Ibn Bāz died in 1999. The loss of "his erudition and reputation for steadfastness" was so great the Saudi government was said to have "found itself staring into a vacuum" unable to find a figure able to "fill ibn Bāz's shoes."[16] His influence on the Salafi movement was large, and most of the prominent judges and religious scholars of Saudi Arabia today are former students of his.

Controversies[edit]

His obituary in The Independent said "His views and fatwas (religious rulings) were controversial, condemned by militants, liberals and progressives alike".[17] He was also criticized by hardline Salafists, Jihadists and Salafist-Jihadists for supporting the decision to permit U.S. troops to be stationed in Saudi Arabia in 1991.[18] His obituaries in both The Economist and The New York Times made reference to ibn Baz sometimes being mocked for his highly traditionalist beliefs.[19][20]

Cosmology[edit]

See also: Orbit of the sun, Geocentric model, Astronomy in Islam, and Apostasy in Islam

In 1966, when Ibn Baz was vice-president of the Islamic University of Medina, he wrote an article denouncing Riyadh University for teaching the "falsehood" that the earth rotates and orbits the sun.[21]

Author Robert Lacey quotes a fatwa by bin Baz urging caution towards claims that the Americans had landed on the moon. "We must make careful checks whenever the kuffar [infidels] or faseqoon [immoral folk] tell us something: we cannot believe or disbelieve them until we get sufficient proof on which the Muslims can depend."[22] Lacey states that "after extensive research" of bin Baz's fatawa, he (Lacey) had only been able to find this one fatwa on the subject, and no statement in it that the earth was flat.[22] Lacey does however say that according to his source, Bin Baz gave an interview after publishing the article

[gabosaurus]

Tyr, why are you using Wikipedia as a source? Certainly you aren't that desperate.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Tyr, why are you using Wikipedia as a source? Certainly you aren't that desperate.

No , just a bit lazy today.. ;)

Wiki isn't all bad . I use it occasionally. So shoot me.. :laugh:--Tyr

[gabosaurus]

Tyr, why do you keep using anti-Muslim sites to present views on Islam? That is like me using "facts" from Democratic Underground to attack Republicans.
I can understand dimwits like AT doing that, but not someone intelligent.

[jafar00]

[QUOTE]]

Criticized by his own, other Muslims , so do not give that its only just Jewish lies crap. -Tyr

So, he had some different ideas that went against the status quo, and he was quite rightly shown the error of his ways. Surely in a Democracy, you are allowed to have a different view and then have that different view debated? Islam is Democratic btw. Our first Caliph, Abu Bakr was elected into the position. Oh, and Muslim women also voted back then unlike in Europe which was still in the dark ages. :poke:

[jimnyc]

No , just a bit lazy today.. ;)

Wiki isn't all bad . I use it occasionally. So shoot me.. :laugh:--Tyr

Just keep doing your thing and ignore the trolls. Wiki is perfectly fine and each "fact" needs citations to back them up. Let the idiots show the incorrect facts presented and prove them wrong, instead of the usual easy way out of just dismissing the site. It's really not done to dismiss the site, as we know, but to avoid getting into the facts and 'attempting' to prove them wrong. And to say that Wikipedia.org is somehow "anti-Islam"? The site proabably has the equivalent of 3,000 almanacs on there and Islam is like one book, if that, but now somehow it's anti-Islam? LOL ignorant idiots!

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

[QUOTE=Tyr-Ziu Saxnot;686553]

So, he had some different ideas that went against the status quo, and he was quite rightly shown the error of his ways. Surely in a Democracy, you are allowed to have a different view and then have that different view debated? Islam is Democratic btw. Our first Caliph, Abu Bakr was elected into the position. Oh, and Muslim women also voted back then unlike in Europe which was still in the dark ages. :poke:

Back then?? Wasn't that at the start? So how did women become lesser beings and therefore banned from voting? If Islam started out God's word and was perfection why are women now treated as lesser beings? And please do not start that tripe about how they are not... FAR too much proof exists to counter that. -Tyr

[jafar00]

[QUOTE=jafar00;686574]

Back then?? Wasn't that at the start? So how did women become lesser beings and therefore banned from voting? If Islam started out God's word and was perfection why are women now treated as lesser beings? And please do not start that tripe about how they are not... FAR too much proof exists to counter that. -Tyr

You are confusing man made customs with Islam that gave women their rights so long ago. Yes, I know some have reverted to pre-Islamic ignorance but don't confuse their ignorance for Islam.

[jimnyc]

Jafar - OT - but are you too saying that wikipedia.org is an anti-Muslim site? Can you show ANYTHING at all to back that up? Anything? I can find a shitload of positive things about Islam/Muslims on there, so it's odd that they would do so if they were anti-Muslim. But let's look at the facts instead of dismissing an entire site.

Show me what you think is purposely wrong over there that has a citation, thus proving they are anti-Muslim. My belief is that they cover facts, or entries that have citations.

[jafar00]

Jafar - OT - but are you too saying that wikipedia.org is an anti-Muslim site? Can you show ANYTHING at all to back that up? Anything? I can find a shitload of positive things about Islam/Muslims on there, so it's odd that they would do so if they were anti-Muslim. But let's look at the facts instead of dismissing an entire site.

Show me what you think is purposely wrong over there that has a citation, thus proving they are anti-Muslim. My belief is that they cover facts, or entries that have citations.

I didn't say that, but you need to take what is written there with a grain of salt. It's not always accurate.

[jimnyc]

I didn't say that, but you need to take what is written there with a grain of salt. It's not always accurate.

Well, you were "liking" the post of a dumbass who claimed that it was, that might give the impression that you as well saw it as anti-Muslim. I question everything I read, especially there, and I even like to further go into the citations for further reassurance. But 'anti-Muslim'? Nope. They cover good and bad from within Islam. They cover good and bad about Catholics. Good and bad about the USA... You get the point. Claiming that Wikipedia is anti-Islam is dumb and without a shred of proof, and I don't think you want to pat her on the back and agree with that one.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

[QUOTE=Tyr-Ziu Saxnot;686681]

You are confusing man made customs with Islam that gave women their rights so long ago. Yes, I know some have reverted to pre-Islamic ignorance but don't confuse their ignorance for Islam.

Care to put a number on your --"some"---??? Since according to your pasts claims its a very , very small number but Sharia law in Muslim nations proves the number is nowhere near small. -Tyr

[jafar00]

Well, you were "liking" the post of a dumbass who claimed that it was, that might give the impression that you as well saw it as anti-Muslim. I question everything I read, especially there, and I even like to further go into the citations for further reassurance. But 'anti-Muslim'? Nope. They cover good and bad from within Islam. They cover good and bad about Catholics. Good and bad about the USA... You get the point. Claiming that Wikipedia is anti-Islam is dumb and without a shred of proof, and I don't think you want to pat her on the back and agree with that one.

I didn't say wikipedia was anti-Islam. The only reason I liked her post was that Tyr does often use websites set up with the express purpose of presenting Islam in a negative way as a source of information about Islam. It's akin to using a Nazi party source for information about Judaism.




Care to put a number on your --"some"---??? Since according to your pasts claims its a very , very small number but Sharia law in Muslim nations proves the number is nowhere near small. -Tyr

Ok, tell me which Muslim nations currently run completely on Islamic Sharia?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I didn't say wikipedia was anti-Islam. The only reason I liked her post was that Tyr does often use websites set up with the express purpose of presenting Islam in a negative way as a source of information about Islam. It's akin to using a Nazi party source for information about Judaism.



Ok, tell me which Muslim nations currently run completely on Islamic Sharia?




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application_of_sharia_law_by_country

Look for yourself , top ones are Iraq , Iran, Pakistan, UAE, etc....

Other nations have a blended system with Sharia not being totally dominant.

Check the link and you will see that my comment that its not a small number is correct. -Tyr

[jafar00]

Look for yourself , top ones are Iraq , Iran, Pakistan, UAE, etc....

Other nations have a blended system with Sharia not being totally dominant.

Check the link and you will see that my comment that its not a small number is correct. -Tyr

Even the wiki says that there are no 100% sharia countries except for Iran (Shia'ism doesn't count) and KSA which is not Sharia since it is based on corrupted wahhabi doctrine.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Even the wiki says that there are no 100% sharia countries except for Iran (Shia'ism doesn't count) and KSA which is not Sharia since it is based on corrupted wahhabi doctrine.

How much (if any) Sharia law is bad? --Tyr

[jafar00]

How much (if any) Sharia law is bad? --Tyr

None. That's why Muslims want to live by Sharia. Not to be confused with the extremist ideology of the wahhabis and taliban btw. Actual, fair Sharia.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

None. That's why Muslims want to live by Sharia. Not to be confused with the extremist ideology of the wahhabis and taliban btw. Actual, fair Sharia.
Can you give a link to --fair Sharia-- or else post your version of it? -Tyr

[jafar00]

Can you give a link to --fair Sharia-- or else post your version of it? -Tyr

No links. If you want to learn about Islam, go to a Mosque and speak to Muslims about it.

In order to have a nation that is fair and righteous, a good leader is needed first to establish rightly guided Sharia. A Caliph of the calibre of Umar Ibn Al-Khattab would be a good start. Here's a wiki link for you since you like it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umar

If I could go back in time and live in any period, it would be during his reign.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

[
QUOTE=jafar00;686958]No links. If you want to learn about Islam, go to a Mosque and speak to Muslims about it.

In order to have a nation that is fair and righteous, a good leader is needed first to establish rightly guided Sharia. A Caliph of the calibre of Umar Ibn Al-Khattab would be a good start. Here's a wiki link for you since you like it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umar

If I could go back in time and live in any period, it would be during his reign.[/QUOTE]

From your link given..



Under Umar, the Rashidun Caliphate expanded at an unprecedented rate, ruling the whole Sasanian Empire and more than two thirds of the Byzantine Empire.[5] His attacks against the Sassanid Persian Empire resulted in the conquest of Persia in fewer than two years.[6] It was Umar, according to Jewish tradition, who set aside the Christian ban on Jews and allowed them into Jerusalem and to worship.[7]


His attacks against the Sassanid Persian Empire resulted in the conquest of Persia in fewer than two years.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Does not read like defense to me. And the source gives no listing of his version of Sharia law. Just shows him to be a great conqueror. I suppose that's why you admire him-- his conquests.-Tyr

[Drummond]

None. That's why Muslims want to live by Sharia. Not to be confused with the extremist ideology of the wahhabis and taliban btw. Actual, fair Sharia.

Nothing bad about Sharia Law ?

In that case, you should have no quarrel with Sharia Courts, set up to apply it, and what they decide ?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196165/Britain-85-sharia-courts-The-astonishing-spread-Islamic-justice-closed-doors.html


Mr MacEoin said: 'Among the rulings we find some that advise illegal actions and others that transgress human rights standards as applied by British courts.'

Examples set out in his study include a ruling that no Muslim woman may marry a non-Muslim man unless he converts to Islam and that any children of a woman who does should be taken from her until she marries a Muslim.

Further rulings, according to the report, approve polygamous marriage and enforce a woman's duty to have sex with her husband on his demand.

The report added: 'The fact that so many sharia rulings in Britain relate to cases concerning divorce and custody of children is of particular concern, as women are not equal in sharia law, and sharia contains no specific commitment to the best interests of the child that is fundamental to family law in the UK.

'Under sharia, a male child belongs to the father after the age of seven, regardless of circumstances.'

It said: 'Sharia courts operating in Britain may be handing down rulings that are inappropriate to this country because they are linked to elements in Islamic law that are seriously out of step with trends in Western legislation.'

The study pointed out that the House of Lords ruled in a child custody case last year that the sharia rules on the matter were 'arbitrary and discriminatory'.

And a 2003 judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg said it was 'difficult to declare one's respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia, which clearly diverges from Convention values.'

This is all 'fine', is it, Jafar ?

[Gaffer]

sharia law is simply each local imam making up laws in his particular district.

My suggestion is remove all sharia law from islam.

[aboutime]

I fully expected both GABBY, and JAFAR to simply ask the question:

"You mean...the Sun doesn't revolve around the Earth?"

And I am reminded of the Astronomy College Graduate from the Jay Leno show who claimed...like many of our present day members of the Liberal Congress...that we have 12 Moons circling the Earth....ONE FOR EACH MONTH!

[jafar00]

This is all 'fine', is it, Jafar ?

It's all fine if you understand it and don't get your information about Islam from a confessed "pro-Israel campaigner (he first visited the country in 1968), who says he has "very negative feelings" about Islam" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denis_MacEoin).

[aboutime]

I fully expected both GABBY, and JAFAR to simply ask the question:

"You mean...the Sun doesn't revolve around the Earth?"

And I am reminded of the Astronomy College Graduate from the Jay Leno show who claimed...like many of our present day members of the Liberal Congress...that we have 12 Moons circling the Earth....ONE FOR EACH MONTH!

BIG CORRECTION to all of the above. I should have said both GABBY, and JAFAR think the SUN rovolves around THEM.

[jafar00]

BIG CORRECTION to all of the above. I should have said both GABBY, and JAFAR think the SUN rovolves around THEM.

You mean it doesn't? From my perspective, it certainly does. Perspective is everything :p

[Drummond]

You mean it doesn't? From my perspective, it certainly does. Perspective is everything :p

Islamists believe just the same thing for Islam.

Ask Anjem Choudary ....

[jafar00]

Islamists believe just the same thing for Islam.

Ask Anjem Choudary ....

I'd sooner kick him in the goolies.

[jimnyc]

I'd sooner kick him in the goolies.

"goolies"? LOL is that balls, I suppose? Gotta remember that one!! :laugh:

[jafar00]

"goolies"? LOL is that balls, I suppose? Gotta remember that one!! :laugh:

You got it :)

[aboutime]

You got it :)

Sure doesn't describe our president, and his foot-in-mouth partner joe.
Best pair of GELDINGS in the History of United States Politics.