Clearing Up Misconceptions about Islam

[basics]

Creepcruncher,

Just supposing the whole world became Muslim, one half of the population would never be seen for who they are and the other, men, could only talk to men outside of the home. What a world that would be but it is what they want. Fortunately it is not what God wants.

[squirel]

Creepcruncher,

Just supposing the whole world became Muslim, one half of the population would never be seen for who they are and the other, men, could only talk to men outside of the home. What a world that would be but it is what they want. Fortunately it is not what God wants.

So you are saying that most muslims aren't muslims. Or that every muslim is like the saudi goverment. Strange.

Skickat från min Nexus 6 via Tapatalk

[VINC.XXIII]

Islam is one of the world’s largest religions yet it is also one of the most misunderstood. For various reasons – be they political, economic, biased media or fear of the “other” – mistruths and misconceptions have been spread about Islam. The key to understanding Islam and Muslims is to resist stereotypes and examine each situation according to Islamic teachings and authentic sources.

About in bold, I don't think you know what you're talking about. Its rather you who have a bias about how supposedly biased are "medias"(assuming you talk about CNN, FoxNews, or have you performed a sort of anthology of islamophobia in french main-stream medias?), what medias?

Can't you just conceive that also peoples are free to judge something from empirical experiences? Meaning jugding a tree by his fruits.

[Fardin]

About in bold, I don't think you know what you're talking about. Its rather you who have a bias about how supposedly biased are "medias"(assuming you talk about CNN, FoxNews, or have you performed a sort of anthology of islamophobia in french main-stream medias?), what medias?
Can't you just conceive that also peoples are free to judge something from empirical experiences? Meaning jugding a tree by his fruits.

I suggest you to read the conclusion part again.
Yes,you can judge a tree by its fruits but not by the fruits that are not from that tree.

Hi Fardin, thanks for sharing

Hello my dear brother
It would be enough for me If I change even one person's thoughts about Islam.

[VINC.XXIII]

I suggest you to read the conclusion part again.

Conclusion:
"Now, I would like you to ask yourself why the old policy of spreading “phobia” and hatred has targeted Islam and Muslims with an unprecedented intensity. Why does the power structure in the world want Islamic thought to be marginalized and remain latent? What concepts and values in Islam disturb the programs of the super powers and what interests are safeguarded in the shadow of distorting the image of Islam? Hence, my first request is: Study and research the incentives behind this widespread tarnishing of the image of Islam.
My second request is that in reaction to the flood of prejudgments and disinformation campaigns, try to gain a direct and firsthand knowledge of this religion. The right logic requires that you understand the nature and essence of what they are frightening you about and want you to keep away from.
I don’t insist that you accept my reading or any other reading of Islam. What I want to say is: Don’t allow this dynamic and effective reality in today’s world to be introduced to you through resentments and prejudices. Don’t allow them to hypocritically introduce their own recruited terrorists as representatives of Islam.
Receive knowledge of Islam from its primary and original sources. Gain information about Islam through the Qur’an and the life of its great Prophet. I would like to ask you whether you have directly read the Qur’an of the Muslims. Have you studied the teachings of the Prophet of Islam and his humane, ethical doctrines? Have you ever received the message of Islam from any sources other than the media?
Have you ever asked yourself how and on the basis of which values has Islam established the greatest scientific and intellectual civilization of the world and raised the most distinguished scientists and intellectuals throughout several centuries?
I would like you not to allow the derogatory and offensive image-buildings to create an emotional gulf between you and the reality, taking away the possibility of an impartial judgment from you. Today, the communication media have removed the geographical borders. Hence, don’t allow them to besiege you within fabricated and mental borders.
Although no one can individually fill the created gaps, each one of you can construct a bridge of thought and fairness over the gaps to illuminate yourself and your surrounding environment. While this preplanned challenge between Islam and you, the youth, is undesirable, it can raise new questions in your curious and inquiring minds. Attempts to find answers to these questions will provide you with an appropriate opportunity to discover new truths.

Therefore, don’t miss the opportunity to gain proper, correct and unbiased understanding of Islam so that hopefully, due to your sense of responsibility toward the truth, future generations would write the history of this current interaction between Islam and the West with a clearer conscience and lesser resentment." some parts of Seyyed Ali Khamenei's letter to the youth of the west (with some edits by me).

You're not mentionning any media in your conclusion. So the premice of your OP is not even based on a fact for what concern "biased media", the least is to give a general opinion by country.

As for the rest of the conclusion, well, what to say...dithyrambic.

[bigdaddy1204]

Hi Fardin, thanks for sharing

I think this forum has needed a thread like this for a very long time. In my opinion, this thread should be stickied at the top of the Political Mudpit list. If everybody in this forum read this thread, then probably the Mudpit would get a lot healthier. People would become educated about the reality, the ignorant posts would stop, and we could actually move forward and have better quality of discussions.

[StarDreamer]

So is this the whitewashing Islam thread?
Also #4 is funny. All books are manmade. It would be ridiculous to consider the koran either a history book, poetry would be debatable. It is however the foundational book for an ideology in the vein of other "holy books" or other more wordly ideologies like maos little red book and the like. Also miracles, wtf? Did it cure people from deadly illnesses now too?

Also considering the contradictory nature of the koran you can most likely find verses contradicting "corrections of misconceptions".

Just face it noone else but muslims will ever consider the koran to be in any way special. It will always just be one book among many others like it.

[bigdaddy1204]

So is this the whitewashing Islam thread?

No. This is the thread where facts are deployed, and ignorance and prejudice are defeated by education. I am glad you are here
Do you have a more specific question/s?

You're not mentionning any media in your conclusion. So the premice of your OP is not even based on a fact for what concern "biased media", the least is to give a general opinion by country.

As for the rest of the conclusion, well, what to say...dithyrambic.

Come on bro, we all know that the media is overwhelmingly biased against Islam/Muslims. Anyone who says otherwise is being disingenuous. Need any of us really point to specific examples? In principle I agree with the need to show evidence but in this case it's so overwhelmingly obvious, it's like demanding evidence that the sky is blue, or that the sun exists.

This is of course bollocks. There is no evidence that there is a god, if there were there is no evidence that Muhammad received messages from said god and it's quite convenient that he received said messages whilst praying on his own in a cave, which gives his claim exactly no credibility. I'm not saying that what's in the Quran is utter nonsense but the claim that it's god's own word is completely unfounded.
I also find it rather ironic that one is encouraged to use one's intellect, free will and reasoning abilities but also has to obey what's written in a book because that is supposedly god's own word. Religion (not just Islam) could really use some critical thinking. It's message of morality generally isn't bad but religions should emphasise more on creating a discussion on morality and other subjects with more room for critisism and different views than just wanting people to blindly follow either god's or the religious institutions' orders. The former would presumably lead to a more critical and acceptive society whereas the latter is divisive and a breeding ground for conflict.
The Quran, like the Bible and other religious books is part fantasy/mythology and part philosophy/ethics.

Hi buddy, based on your location I'm assuming English is not your first language? The word "bollocks" is a lot more strong than you think. This word is vulgar/profane/offensive. When I was growing up, this word was not allowed. It's like using the word . It is not really acceptable to use this word in polite company. I was very shocked to see this word being used by a moderator. It's not appropriate. I'm sure this was unintentional. Just letting you know to help improve your English for next time The word "Rubbish" could be used to convey the same meaning, without being offensive.

I think as for the point about god, it really becomes quite important to define what exactly we mean by "god". What does the word "god" mean to you?

Let's assume for a moment that it's true. The Quran is truly the words of a god. Then why is it so full of inconsistencies and/or errors?
Is it a language issue, as in your god is a poetic fellow who prefers to speak in riddles or fill you wiith false or misleading information? And how do you view that sort of "poetic license" when it comes to something so important? Assuming you don't take it all literally (I can't see how anyone could, and still keep their intellectual honesty intact), how do you distinguish between what should considered symbolic and what should not?

I'd say it isn't necessarily inconsistent, however it may appear to be so to those without an understanding of the context. A great example is the commonly-used verse which refers to "and kill them wherever you find them" (Quran 2.191). This is taken out of context by uneducated people to claim there is a contradiction between this and other peaceful versus of the Quran, which state that "any person who took a life, it would be as if he killed all humanity, and any person who saved a life, it would be as if he saved all humanity." (Quran 5.32) But the scholar of history knows that the first quote refers to a specific battle against a tribe which had broken its treaty and betrayed the community, whereas the latter is a universal statement of values. People also forget to include the caveat to the first quote, which states "but if they desist, then you must also desist and make peace. And do not cross limits, because allah does not like the aggressor."(Quran 2.192 and 193) This means that war is a last resort, should only be defensive, and must stop as soon as the other side wishes to cease hostilities.

[VINC.XXIII]

Come on bro, we all know that the media is overwhelmingly biased against Islam/Muslims. Anyone who says otherwise is being disingenuous. Need any of us really point to specific examples? In principle I agree with the need to show evidence but in this case it's so overwhelmingly obvious, it's like demanding evidence that the sky is blue, or that the sun exists.

"the media" in France are contrarily to your belief, strongly advocating Tolerance, Peace, Living-Together, Values of the Republic, and all other possible craps every time an islamic attack has occured. In that regard its completly different from ton used on Fox New(I'm just throwing that name, not sure how its really islamophobic).

The most usual thing on french TV being to interview "peaceful" muslims over and over, always coming with the same mantra "islam is peace" and similar redundant, rebarbative leitmotives.

oh...and today, there was an oecumenic reunion(under the auspices of Living-Together) in Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray, where that priest was beheaded. Then good ethnomasochist leftist catholics were allowed to listen at the preach of that good imam...

I know it by watching at TV the stuff, that very same TV you're accusing(without watching it) for being "overwhelmingly biased against Islam/Muslims".

You see french TV work like a prism, something deforming the reality, where everyone burn candles and eat honey cakes and drink thea. Of course they would never interview someone whose they're not sure that he will say something else than "peace and love"...

http://www.lemonde.fr/societe/articl...6472_3224.html

The umpteeth ceremony I'm talking about. I will update it with a video if never I can.

[Fardin]

@VINC.XXIII
Since I don't know french,I'm very clueless about french media, I don't remember I've said anything about that,Mostly I fallow BBC,fox news,CNN or Guardian and our media because I don't fully trust any source or media and I want you to do the same.I suggest you to fallow Press TV sometimes,It has the most accurate news as far as I know.
I translated your article and it seems really good, I should say I'm impressed! See? You can clear a misconception for me as well.Keep up the good work.I'll be welcoming towards any article like this.
There is no need for a fight or any ironic words,we are here to improve our knowledge.

Let's assume for a moment that it's true. The Quran is truly the words of a god. Then why is it so full of inconsistencies and/or errors?
Is it a language issue, as in your god is a poetic fellow who prefers to speak in riddles or fill you wiith false or misleading information? And how do you view that sort of "poetic license" when it comes to something so important? Assuming you don't take it all literally (I can't see how anyone could, and still keep their intellectual honesty intact), how do you distinguish between what should considered symbolic and what should not?

Let's continue our discussion in details, Can you share some of that errors or inconsistencies with us?
Arabic is a very complicated language so all of the translations are not true.
if you want to distinguish between wrong and true translations, you should know Arabic with a high degree.

@Mangalore please speak in details not like: yeah, persians knew that and this one,nothing but absolute nonsense ,oh look at that one! seems like roman style .Stop fussing like this and bring proofs anyone knew those before.You should notice that the prophet lived in the city of illiterates and if you look at Arabian peninsula, there is no mountain that high to feel the lack of oxygen.the only mountain in middle east that maybe you can feel like that on the top is the Damavand mount in the north of Iran .in Quran there are many Ayat that mentions to the both sex of animals just like the way is mentioning to the sex of plants.as far as I know Kepler discovered the orbits of planets and before him an Iranian astronomer proved there are orbits.The astronomers of that era thought the earth is in the center of universe and sun turns around the earth,can you name someone who didn't think like this?
This website would be interesting for you:
http://scientific-facts.com/

[DaVinci]

@VINC.XXIII
Since I don't know french,I'm very clueless about french media, I don't remember I've said anything about that,Mostly I fallow BBC,fox news,CNN or Guardian and our media because I don't fully trust any source or media and I want you to do the same.I suggest you to fallow Press TV sometimes,It has the most accurate news as far as I know.
I translated your article and it seems really good, I should say I'm impressed! See? You can clear a misconception for me as well.Keep up the good work.I'll be welcoming towards any article like this.
There is no need for a fight or any ironic words,we are here to improve our knowledge.

Let's continue our discussion in details, Can you share some of that errors or inconsistencies with us?
Arabic is a very complicated language so all of the translations are not true.
if you want to distinguishing between wrong and true translations, you should know Arabic with a high degree.

@Mangalore please speak in details not like: yeah, persians knew that and this one,nothing but absolute nonsense ,oh look at that one! seems like roman style .Stop fussing like this and bring proofs anyone knew those before.You should notice that the prophet lived in the city of illiterates and if you look at Arabian peninsula, there is no mountain that high to feel the lack of oxygen.the only mountain in middle east that maybe you can feel like that on the top is the Damavand mount in the north of Iran .in Quran there are many Ayat that mentions to the both sex of animals just like the way is mentioning to the sex of plants.as far as I know Kepler discovered the orbits of planets and before him an Iranian astronomer proved there are orbits.The astronomers of that era thought the earth is in the center of universe and sun turns around the earth,can you name someone who didn't think like this?
This website would be interesting for you:
http://scientific-facts.com/

As for knowledge in sciences, i pointed out already, that the medieval orient had a leading position, which triggered to some extent the european Renaissance. What does Renaissance mean? It is the discovery of re-awareness of former known knowlegde which was held covered during the dark age and extended to the middleage in europe. Right, nobody could read except the catholic priests (and a very few nobles). The orient at the time, led to a kinda glory by the Arab rule, used but all knowledges to the date instead of banning something. Alexander the Great brought greek knowledge to the orient, Rome did its part there as well. The melting of all these at the time advanced knowledges led to the progress.

Yes, i say it here, it's multiculturalism, that brought progress (knowing, that some of our certain TWC'ers craze out now).
From on the Renaissance, the old knowledges re-awoked, and triggered a big change in european areas. Enlightment, Humanism and Liberalism are results.

So again, the question, why did such a further development stopped somehow in the orient?
And/or, is it so, that the mentioned items are not seen as progress? And if so, why?

[squirel]

"the media" in France are contrarily to your belief, strongly advocating Tolerance, Peace, Living-Together, Values of the Republic, and all other possible craps every time an islamic attack has occured. In that regard its completly different from ton used on Fox New(I'm just throwing that name, not sure how its really islamophobic).

The most usual thing on french TV being to interview "peaceful" muslims over and over, always coming with the same mantra "islam is peace" and similar redundant, rebarbative leitmotives.

oh...and today, there was an oecumenic reunion(under the auspices of Living-Together) in Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray, where that priest was beheaded. Then good ethnomasochist leftist catholics were allowed to listen at the preach of that good imam...

I know it by watching at TV the stuff, that very same TV you're accusing(without watching it) for being "overwhelmingly biased against Islam/Muslims".

You see french TV work like a prism, something deforming the reality, where everyone burn candles and eat honey cakes and drink thea. Of course they would never interview someone whose they're not sure that he will say something else than "peace and love"...

http://www.lemonde.fr/societe/articl...6472_3224.html

The umpteeth ceremony I'm talking about. I will update it with a video if never I can.

Tolerance, peace and living together refering to what ? Who is the imam, is it someone special ?

[VINC.XXIII]

Tolerance, peace and living together refering to what ? Who is the imam, is it someone special ?

Peace, Tolerance, Living-Together are sort of concepts empty of any real meaning, overused by both politicians, journalists, catholic prelates, and imams , thats projections defining how relations are supposed to be harmonious between christians/muslims, white/black, white/arabian, arabian/black, arabian/jew, black/jew. I'm forgetting other minorities.

That imam had nothing "special", like others I mentionned who occupy most of the visual public space, he's very moderated. In fact he's himself a projection.

Anyway, the OP describe not the real sensibility of most of western medias, thats all which is good to know.

[bigdaddy1204]

"the media" in France are contrarily to your belief, strongly advocating Tolerance, Peace, Living-Together, Values of the Republic,

Wow! This sounds amazing The media where I live isn't like that at all, it's the complete opposite of all those things. Thanks for sharing!

The most usual thing on french TV being to interview "peaceful" muslims over and over, always coming with the same mantra "islam is peace"

Omg! They actually tell the truth? I have never once seen anything like this in the media in my country. Instead they always bring the most idiot extreme people possible, and they NEVER interview anyone sensible. This vision you describe is wonderful! I wish it could be like that here.

[PointOfViewGun]

So is this the whitewashing Islam thread?
Also #4 is funny. All books are manmade. It would be ridiculous to consider the koran either a history book, poetry would be debatable. It is however the foundational book for an ideology in the vein of other "holy books" or other more wordly ideologies like maos little red book and the like. Also miracles, wtf? Did it cure people from deadly illnesses now too?

Also considering the contradictory nature of the koran you can most likely find verses contradicting "corrections of misconceptions".

Just face it noone else but muslims will ever consider the koran to be in any way special. It will always just be one book among many others like it.

No, you can't really successfully come up with contradicting verses.

Saying that no non-Muslim will ever consider Quran to be a special book is as senseless as saying that no Muslim will ever consider that Quran is not special. You could very well point out that the sky is blue.

You're not mentionning any media in your conclusion. So the premice of your OP is not even based on a fact for what concern "biased media", the least is to give a general opinion by country.

As for the rest of the conclusion, well, what to say...dithyrambic.

It's no secret that media of at least USA prefers to focus on those that portray Islam in a particular way. When a Muslim does something bad you usually have a really bigoted imam come on TV with his beard and white robe making stupid remarks on national TV. You never, or at best rarely, see a sane imam being taken on the TV for the same topics.

Let's assume for a moment that it's true. The Quran is truly the words of a god. Then why is it so full of inconsistencies and/or errors?
Is it a language issue, as in your god is a poetic fellow who prefers to speak in riddles or fill you wiith false or misleading information? And how do you view that sort of "poetic license" when it comes to something so important? Assuming you don't take it all literally (I can't see how anyone could, and still keep their intellectual honesty intact), how do you distinguish between what should considered symbolic and what should not?

Where does Quran contradict itself? You're making too many claims without the slightest example to illustrate them. I find that ironic coming from a position that claims to be based on logic and reason. Are we supposed to just believe you and move on?

[VINC.XXIII]

It's no secret that media of at least USA prefers to focus on those that portray Islam in a particular way. When a Muslim does something bad you usually have a really bigoted imam come on TV with his beard and white robe making stupid remarks on national TV. You never, or at best rarely, see a sane imam being taken on the TV for the same topics.

Thats definitively not what I'm watching.

If I've to make number one classification of channels fitting to my opinions(shared by about 1/3 of french electorate), I would say that only LCI has a neutral ton. Of course no question to just vilify freely french muslims(since that wouldn't be neutral, when I say "neutral", its more about yet to avoid the candles orgy.

All other TV channels are more or less of the same stock.

As about what "figures" of islam who were the most invited or interviewed on public channels and major private ones:

-Dalil Boubakeur
-Tareq Oubrou

Tarek Ramadan was also often invited on TV, I don't think he's exactly that "beard/white robe" imam you're painting.

[PointOfViewGun]

A few questions if I may. (This thread seems rather heated right now, no rush to answer).

- Islam has a position about abortion? (Voluntary termination of pregnancy in the first trimester).
- From an Islamic perspective, a homosexual is a person as healthy and normal as a heterosexual?
- Must be the formation of a family a primary goal of a muslim?
- Are equally respectable and moral a muslim, the member of any other religion, and an atheist?

Abortion is a strange subject. It varies on country or school of thought. For example, in Turkey, the subject of abortion rarely comes. It's legal. Many schools of thought acknowledge abortion when the health of the mother is in line. In other cases, they vary. However, there is an interesting bit. Not all schools of thought believes what Christians usually believe, that life starts with conception. They look at when the soul enters the body. For that, it varies between 40 days to 120 days. So, there is quite room for it. Quran merely upholds the sanctity of life and doesn't go beyond that.

In Quran, homosexuality is only touched upon in the story of Lot and even there it's not exclusively homosexuality but forced homosexuality highlighted with the story where they even try to rape two angels disguised as boys. I can't, however, say that it sees a homosexual person as same as anyone else. At best, it's viewed as an unnatural phenomenon. However, keep in mind that, homophobia in it's severity today in the Middle East is a fairly new thing. Back in early 19th century homosexual intellectuals who fled Europe actually went to Middle Eastern states for the tolerance they experienced there.

Never heard a primary goal that went in the lines of forming a family. Primary goals are usually about belief in Allah and good acts. It's surely important but it's not really advocated as an absolute necessity.

I'm not sure what you're asking in the last one.

Thats definitively not what I'm watching.
If I've to make number one classification of channels fitting to my opinions(shared by about 1/3 of french electorate), I would say that only LCI has a neutral ton. Of course no question to just vilify freely french muslims(since that wouldn't be neutral, when I say "neutral", its more about yet to avoid the candles orgy.
All other TV channels are more or less of the same stock.
As about what "figures" of islam who were the most invited or interviewed on public channels and major private ones:
-Dalil Boubakeur
-Tareq Oubrou
Tarek Ramadan was also often invited on TV, I don't think he's exactly that "beard/white robe" imam you're painting.

I was specifically talking about USA media. I haven't watched French TV stations enough to make a judgment.

[mishkin]

Thanks a lot mate

I'm not sure what you're asking in the last one.

Are equally respectable and moral a muslim, the member of any other religion, and an atheist?

Many times some people (usually christians here at TWC) have wondered whether it is possible to be a moral person (no distinction is made with ethics) without being a religious person, as if a nonreligious person is not reliable, have less brakes to be inmoral or is simply an amoral (has no ethics).
A non-Muslim is seen as someone a Muslim must distrust, someone in principle can not be fully trusted, or is accepted as a complete person, without moral shortcomings, with virtues and defects like any Muslim?

[Flavius Julius Nepos Augustus]

The problem with Islam today is clear to me:

Many thinkers, politicians and people in the west embrace the values of the French Revolution, making them almost holy symbols. To name a few: separation of church and state, equal rights (also for women, but this was rapidly crushed after/during the Frenh Revolution, very interesting),freedom, and building a state by the people for the people (this developed in stages).

In the decades that followed Europe did not only have military superiority, but also a cultural & political superiority. The elite in nations like Siam, Persia & the Ottoman empire certainly did not detest this foreign culture & political system. They introduced it, shaped it and used it. <- this was expected by the western nations, because "uncivilised" people "could use" a colonial regime for "development".
It was mainly a large part of the elite that upheld our values (through colonistation or not). The common people, especially in rural areas, were left untouched. Some nuance: In Europe many people in rural areas rejected the values of the French Revolution. Until the Vatican (something that the muslim world lacks) accepted the modern world in the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council. Today a great minority of Muslims still rejects the values (directly or indirectly through their support of Sharia law, accepting honour killings etc.)

I don't directly blame Islam as a whole: the bible, especialy the OT has some really eerie stuff. Some blame: taking the Quran as the exact word of God (while the original is not there, the old Qurans were burned) and that way not posing questions forms a basis for radicalism. I assume that in parts of Islam people read the Quran critically. Critical study of the Bible formed the basis for the formation the modern world.

I WILL KEEP IT SHORT. The lack of large scale critical reading in Islam combined with economical problems, (geo-)polical landscape, cultural divides "western" people from a large minority of Muslims (and so Muslims get blamed in general).

So I thank you for making this thread but I fear I cannot accept it if I look into some details.

I make a bit larger post, just because it is Sunday and God himself gave me a day off work, what a nice being!

[Fardin]

So is this the whitewashing Islam thread?
Also #4 is funny. All books are manmade. It would be ridiculous to consider the koran either a history book, poetry would be debatable. It is however the foundational book for an ideology in the vein of other "holy books" or other more wordly ideologies like maos little red book and the like. Also miracles, wtf? Did it cure people from deadly illnesses now too?

Also considering the contradictory nature of the koran you can most likely find verses contradicting "corrections of misconceptions".

Just face it noone else but muslims will ever consider the koran to be in any way special. It will always just be one book among many others like it.

Hello dear friend
Please be polite next time,I'm not a polite person at all but this is a public forum with a serious topic.
And I'll demand examples and proofs for every word,so choose your words carefully next time.
This would be enough for now,I'll post more soon.

At the first place I want to prove that Qur'an is only from the God and No human is able to write such a book.
أَفَلَا يَتَدَبَّرُونَ الْقُرْآنَ وَلَوْ كَانَ مِنْ عِنْدِ غَيْرِ اللَّهِ لَوَجَدُوا فِيهِ اخْتِلَافًا كَثِيرًا (نساء 86)
translation:Will they not then ponder on the Qur'an? If it had been from other than Allah they would have found therein much incongruity.

«أَمْ يَقُولُونَ افْتَرَاهُ قُلْ فَأْتُواْ بِعَشْرِ سُوَرٍ مِّثْلِهِ مُفْتَرَيَاتٍ وَادْعُواْ مَنِ اسْتَطَعْتُم مِّن دُونِ اللّهِ إِن كُنتُمْ صَادِقِينَ» (هود، 13)
translation:Or they may say, "He forged it," Say, "Bring ye then ten suras forged, like unto it, and call (to your aid) whomsoever ye can, other than Allah!- If ye speak the truth!

«*أَمْ يَقُولُونَ افْتَرَاهُ قُلْ فَأْتُواْ بِسُورَةٍ مِّثْلِهِ وَادْعُواْ مَنِ اسْتَطَعْتُم مِّن دُونِ اللّهِ إِن كُنتُمْ صَادِقِينَ*» (یونس، 38)
translation:Or do they say, "He forged it"? say: "Bring then a Sura like unto it, and call (to your aid) anyone you can besides Allah, if it be ye speak the truth!"

Bring the things that the God said if you can!
And now I'll put some miracles of Quran:
أَلَمْ نَجْعَلِ الْأَرْضَ كِفَاتًا ﴿۲۵﴾
translation:We made the earth with the gravitation(mentioning to the gravity of earth 1100 years before the Newton)

وَهُوَ الَّذِي خَلَقَ اللَّيْلَ وَالنَّهَارَ وَالشَّمْسَ وَالْقَمَرَ كُلٌّ فِي فَلَكٍ يَسْبَحُونَ ﴿۳۳﴾
translation:And He is Who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon. They float, each in an orbit.(mentioning to the orbits of planets and moving of the stars)

خَلَقَ السَّمَاوَاتِ بِغَيْرِ عَمَدٍ تَرَوْنَهَا وَأَلْقَى فِي الْأَرْضِ رَوَاسِيَ أَنْ تَمِيدَ بِكُمْ وَبَثَّ فِيهَا مِنْ كُلِّ دَابَّةٍ وَأَنْزَلْنَا مِنَ السَّمَاءِ مَاءً فَأَنْبَتْنَا فِيهَا مِنْ كُلِّ زَوْجٍ كَرِيمٍ ﴿۱۰﴾
translation:He created the heavens without any pillars that ye can see; He set on the earth mountains standing firm, lest it should shake with you; and He scattered through it beasts of all kinds. We send down rain from the sky, and produce on the earth every kind of noble creature, in pairs.(mentioning to the both sex(male and female) of the plants 1200 years before Carl Nilsson)

فَمَنْ يُرِدِ اللَّهُ أَنْ يَهْدِيَهُ يَشْرَحْ صَدْرَهُ لِلْإِسْلَامِ وَمَنْ يُرِدْ أَنْ يُضِلَّهُ يَجْعَلْ صَدْرَهُ ضَيِّقًا حَرَجًا كَأَنَّمَا يَصَّعَّدُ فِي السَّمَاءِ كَذَلِكَ يَجْعَلُ اللَّهُ الرِّجْسَ عَلَى الَّذِينَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ ﴿۱۲۵﴾
translation:Those whom Allah (in His plan) willeth to guide,- He openeth their breast to Islam; those whom He willeth to leave straying,- He maketh their breast close and constricted, as if they had to climb up to the skies: thus doth Allah (heap) the penalty on those who refuse to believe.(mentioning to the lack of oxygen in the sky near space)

Do you accept this book is only from the God or I should bring you more?
إِنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا بِالذِّكْرِ لَمَّا جَاءَهُمْ وَإِنَّهُ لَكِتَابٌ عَزِيزٌ ﴿۴۱﴾
translation:Those who reject the Message when it comes to them (are not hidden from Us). And indeed it is a Book of exalted power. (۴۱)

لَا يَأْتِيهِ الْبَاطِلُ مِنْ بَيْنِ يَدَيْهِ وَلَا مِنْ خَلْفِهِ تَنْزِيلٌ مِنْ حَكِيمٍ حَمِيدٍ ﴿۴۲﴾
translation:No falsehood can approach it from before or behind it: It is sent down by One Full of Wisdom, Worthy of all Praise.

هُوَ الَّذِي أَنْزَلَ عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ مِنْهُ آيَاتٌ مُحْكَمَاتٌ هُنَّ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَابَهَ مِنْهُ ابْتِغَاءَ الْفِتْنَةِ وَابْتِغَاءَ تَأْوِيلِهِ وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُ إِلَّا اللَّهُ وَالرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ آمَنَّا بِهِ كُلٌّ مِنْ عِنْدِ رَبِّنَا وَمَا يَذَّكَّرُ إِلَّا أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ ﴿۷﴾
translation:He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book: In it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they are the foundation of the Book: others are allegorical. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings, but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: "We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord:" and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.

وَهَذَا صِرَاطُ رَبِّكَ مُسْتَقِيمًا قَدْ فَصَّلْنَا الْآيَاتِ لِقَوْمٍ يَذَّكَّرُونَ ﴿۱۲۶﴾
translation:This is the way of thy Lord, leading straight: We have detailed the signs for those who receive admonition.
May the Allah Guide you!