When The Words of God Echoe through the World

Sometimes it is hard to ignore the striking similarities between the words of a leading figure that we come across in life and the words of God in Quran.   Compare the following two cases and make your own judgment. 

One thing these echoes could remind us of, is the fact that there is someone creating these voices.  They may work as another call to the truth.  It will, however, be our choice as always,whether to believe in these coincidences as a message of God or to deny them one after another as they show up in the course of our life.

It is important to note that our fate for this life and for the one after starts to shape up with making our daily choices; either to confirm what resonates with us as God's sign especially tailored for us (others may not relate to it) or to reject them as just work of nature with no special purpose behind.

I believe if we perceive some events in our life (after examining by reason ) as God's work in our individual life circumstances then we may engage in a life changing conversation with God. Conversely, if we choose to reduce it as purely accidental or .... then it becomes harder and harder for us to realize the truth which is seeing God running the world in every details.

The path of denial would inevitably end up with learning it the hard way which is essentially going through undeniable physical pain that will wake us up and force us embrace the truth.  This is basically the law of nature itself.  For example, if we ignore the symptoms of our health problems, we may end up in such a painful situation that we will have to rush to an emergency room to find out the cause and seek treatment.

We don't have to go through the unbearable bodily pains in order to keep up with a good health. By the same analogy, we don’t have to walk down the path of denial which will lead us to the wrong place in the afterlife, although we are free to choose.

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيم

One:

39:42

اللَّهُ يَتَوَفَّى الْأَنفُسَ حِينَ مَوْتِهَا وَالَّتِي لَمْ تَمُتْ فِي مَنَامِهَا ۖ فَيُمْسِكُ الَّتِي قَضَىٰ

عَلَيْهَا الْمَوْتَ وَيُرْسِلُ الْأُخْرَىٰ إِلَىٰ أَجَلٍ مُّسَمًّى ۚ إِنَّ فِي ذَٰلِكَ لَآيَاتٍ لِّقَوْمٍ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ .

"Allah takes the souls at the time of their death, and those that do not die [He takes] during their sleep. Then He keeps those for which He has decreed death and releases the others for a specified term. Indeed in that are signs for a people who give thought."

Now listen to Nicholas Humphrey, an English Psychologist in the University of Cambridge as he talks about secrets of sleep. This is part of an article by Robert Lawrence Kuhn on LiveScience.com titled "Why Sleep?, Why Dreams?",  Robert is the host of "Closer to the Truth" TV series, whose quest to find the truth seems genuine to me.  

Humphrey, in his first minute of talk says: 

"Sleep is a sort of little death, and what this 'death' tells us is that we survive it: we go to sleep — our consciousness is obliterated, we are obliterated — but, sure thing, next day, we recreate ourselves. And this is such a regular occurrence that, of course, we just take it for granted, but it is a kind of miracle — we lose consciousness and then out of nothing it all comes back again."

"It's like a kind of Big Bang. The universe created out of nothing. We repeat that everyday when we wake up."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7RI7whj5m0

On YouTube: Nicholas Humphrey - Secretes of Sleep

Two:

15:14-15

وَلَوْ فَتَحْنَا عَلَيْهِم بَابًا مِّنَ السَّمَاءِ فَظَلُّوا فِيهِ يَعْرُجُونَ - 15:14

"And [even] if We opened to them a gate from the heaven and they continued therein to ascend,"

لَقَالُوا إِنَّمَا سُكِّرَتْ أَبْصَارُنَا بَلْ نَحْنُ قَوْمٌ مَّسْحُورُونَ - 15:15

"They would say, "Our eyes have only been dazzled. Rather, we are a people affected by magic."

Similarly, in the last minute of the this video, Dr. William Lane Craig, an American analytic philosopher and Christian apologist, responds to an atheist who asks why God does not show up in  the sky and confirms his existence to us so we can see and believe.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmnRQ3P3Bwo
On YouTube: Dr William Lane Craig Vs Biased atheist Dogma (Presuppositional Apologetics)

While there is a lot we can learn from Dr. Craig's arguments against atheists, I find his comments about Quran and Islam  inaccurate and clearly biased.  

Is There any Verse in the Quran That Revokes a Preceding Command?

Some  Muslim scholars believe there are verses which revoke a previously stated command in the Quran.   Disbelievers, on the other hand, resort to such verses to claim that the Quran is Mohammad's invention.

The purpose of this post is to show although the Quran apparently confirms substitution of some verses in place of the others, we can not find any verse that would, in fact, revoke an earlier command in Quran.  In other words, even knowing that some verses has been definitely replaced, we are still unable to find any evidence, hence the Quran miraculously remains contradiction free. Therefore, we can infer that replacing some verses do not necessarily mean  abrogating a previously given command.

Conversely, the skeptic would say the fact that God says he has replaced some versus and yet we can not find them is itself contradictory.  The Quran's answer is stated in the verse 2:106; God may have caused it to be forgotten.

The first two verses below are considered as the proof of abrogation of some verses in Quran.  The next three pairs of verses are the most famously believed cases in which the second verse is said to abrogate the first one.  There are however, many other verses in Quran which are, more controversially, believed by some scholars to have been substituted by a newer one.

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيم

وَإِذَا بَدَّلْنَا آيَةً مَّكَانَ آيَةٍ ۙ وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا يُنَزِّلُ قَالُوا إِنَّمَا أَنتَ مُفْتَرٍ ۚ بَلْ أَكْثَرُهُمْ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ - 16:101

SAHIH INTERNATIONAL

"And when We substitute a verse in place of a verse - and Allah is most knowing of what He sends down - they say, "You, [O Muhammad], are but an inventor [of lies]." But most of them do not know."

مَا نَنسَخْ مِنْ آيَةٍ أَوْ نُنسِهَا نَأْتِ بِخَيْرٍ مِّنْهَا أَوْ مِثْلِهَا ۗ أَلَمْ تَعْلَمْ أَنَّ اللَّهَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ - 2:106

"We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent?"

-------------------------------------

8:72 "Indeed, those who have believed and emigrated and fought with their wealth and lives in the cause of Allah and those who gave shelter and aided - they are allies of one another. But those who believed and did not emigrate - for you there is no guardianship of them until they emigrate. And if they seek help of you for the religion, then you must help, except against a people between yourselves and whom is a treaty. And Allah is Seeing of what you do".

33:6 "The Prophet is more worthy of the believers than themselves, and his wives are [in the position of] their mothers. And those of [blood] relationship are more entitled [to inheritance] in the decree of Allah than the [other] believers and the emigrants, except that you may do to your close associates a kindness [through bequest]. That was in the Book inscribed."

---------------------------------------

2:240 "And those who are taken in death among you and leave wives behind - for their wives is a bequest: maintenance for one year without turning [them] out. But if they leave [of their own accord], then there is no blame upon you for what they do with themselves in an acceptable way. And Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise."

2:234 "And those who are taken in death among you and leave wives behind - they, [the wives, shall] wait four months and ten [days]. And when they have fulfilled their term, then there is no blame upon you for what they do with themselves in an acceptable manner. And Allah is [fully] Acquainted with what you do."

--------------------------------------

58:12  "O you who have believed, when you [wish to] privately consult the Messenger, present before your consultation a charity. That is better for you and purer. But if you find not [the means] - then indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."

58:13"Have you feared to present before your consultation charities? Then when you do not and Allah has forgiven you, then [at least] establish prayer and give zakah and obey Allah and His Messenger. And Allah is Acquainted with what you do."

--------------------------------------

صدق الله العلي العظيم

The verse 16:101 is the main ground to claim that God has cancelled some of his commands by replacing the new ones.  This understanding comes from equating replacing with cancelling earlier commands which is not stated in the verse itself.

In fact, the verses of 16:101 and 2:106 themselves, are the best example of a potential case of abrogation.  One may suggest the verse 16:101 states God might have substituted some verses with others while 2:106 emphasizes that God does not cancel a verse unless he brings in a better one or a similar verse. It therefore, appears that the verse 16:101 is replaced by 2:106.  

The truth of the matter however, is the second verse of 2:106 is a clarification of the previous one.  It is a further explanation of the same issue that God does not revoke an earlier verse but it provides a different perspective on the same matter to help us understand better or otherwise we are unable to find such a substitution in our memory which is the same as non-existence for us, humans.

-------------------------------------------

The first pair  is viewed as referring to inheritance.  It is believed that the verse 8:72 is meant to equally entitle the early immigrant believers, from Mecca, to what they would have obtained from wars or the Medina-based Muslims may have left after their death.   In this view, the verse 33:6 cancels this equality in inheritance and limit the inheritance to relatives only, unless including them in inheritance  is done voluntarily.

I am not really sure how the verse 8:72 is associated to inheritance as the verse (in Arabic) clearly uses the word " ولایتهم " which has to do with protection not inheritance.  That is to say, 8:72 is clearly stating that the newly established community in Medina does not have an obligation to go back to Mecca and fight for those few Muslims who didn't flee to Medina.

The verse 33:6 however, is prioritizing close relatives (= آرحام ) over all the other believers and Muslims in their entitlement ( possibly to inheritance).  This verse is not talking about the obligation of protecting other Muslims if they seek help.  Therefore, these two verses are clearly addressing two different concerns, thus the verse 33:6 is not abrogating the 8:72.

---------------------------------------------

The Second pair is said to determine the time when a widow should wait before she engages in a new relationship with another man. In this interpretation, the verse 2:240 specifies one year for the women before she can remarry.   Accordingly, the verse 2;234  then reduces the wait period to four months and ten days only.  This way, the verse 2;234 has cancelled an earlier command.

On a closer look on these two verses, we notice that the verse 2:240 is, in fact, commanding the men who are dying to support their wives for a year should their widow chooses not to leave the house of their dead man.  This verse also emphasizes that if the woman chooses to leave their former husband's house before the end of the one year period, it is up to them and the husband is not be blamed for her decision to leave earlier than one year or why he didn't support her.

This is while the verse 2:234 addresses the widows (not the dying men), specifying their obligation to wait four months and ten days from their husband's death.  After this period, they have the right to start a new relationships with another man if they wish to do so.

The important point in these two verses is although the dying husband has an obligation of providing for his wife for one year, the widow must only wait for four months and ten days to engages with another man.  Needless to say, if the woman chooses to stay in his husband's house, which implies benefiting from his financial support, then she is entitled for one year on the condition that she does not take on a new relationship.

The fact of the matter is, I do not see any command being changed in these two verses. Each of the two verses addresses a different side of this relationship specifying two separate obligations.  That is, the obligation of a husband to his wife after his death and the obligation of a widow to his former husband.  There is no cancellation of an earlier command in this case either.

---------------------------------------

The third pair is a perfect example of how the second verse provides further instructions following an earlier command (58:12) without conflicting it.

The verse 58:12 is simply setting the requirement of  giving a charity prior to consulting with the prophet. It also tells us that if you can't, God is forgiving, but it does not provide any alternative.  The verse 58:13, on the other hand, is opening a way for those who have feared to give a charity.  If they have sought God's forgiveness, they can pray and give "Zakat" which is a money to pay to the poor.

In other words, you may not be able to come up with a presentable charity when you are about to meet the prophet but you can make it up at your time with praying and giving a "Zakat" alternatively. Does the second verse ( 58:13) revoke anything in the previous verse? Absolutely and clearly not.

---------------------------------------

Considering the above three pairs of verses that are said to be the most known cases in which an earlier command is abrogated by a new one, we can conclude that there is no such conflicting verses in the Quran or that we can not find them.  I don't however, claim that I have checked all other cases and have refuted their potential contradiction as well.  I am therefore, open to check any counter example you may find on this subject.
 

Empirical Evidence Vs Personal Expeience

Lack of "empirical evidence" is probably the main argument of an atheist against existence of God. By empirical evidence, I mean, the kind of proof that can be verified through our five basic senses; sight, hearing, taste, touch and smell.

It is fair to say that all the natural sciences that man has accumulated through ages is derived from and based on empirical experience.  That is to say, the raw data collected and received through our senses are internally processed by our mind and then a rational conclusion is drawn as a fact of life which makes our life easier.   We touch a burning martial, we feel the pain on our hand and it registers in our mind as fact of life that we will avoid our entire life afterwards.

The component of rational processing appears to be more significant in some the branches of our knowledge such as humanities and art.  In philosophy for example, being the most abstract subject to study, we still gather empirical data which often constitute part of the premises based on which we develop a rational argument to come to a conclusion.

The purpose of this post is to show that the nature of  a "personal experience" is in truth not that different from other branches of human's knowledge and it is as credible, except for the fact that  it does not lead to a quantifiable formula just in the same way that all disciplines of Arts and Humanities do not.  To this end, I am going to contrast the nature of "empirical evidence", which leads to empirical science, with "Personal Experience" which  results in faith in the context of a simple experiment of science.

Before that let's check their definitions in Wikipedia.

"Empirical evidence, also known as sense experience, is the knowledge or source of knowledge acquired by means of the senses, particularly by observation and experimentation."


"Personal experience of a human being is the moment-to-moment experience and sensory awareness of internal and external events or a sum of experiences forming an empirical unity such as a period of life."

The credibility of an empirical evidence mainly comes from two claims; firstly, it is said to be verifiable by everyone and secondly it is expected to bear the same results (absolute) in different experiments. We can evaluate these claims in an experiment to verify the effect of heat on the length of a piece of metal bar or a metal stick with a known length.

Simply, imagine we heat our metal piece for 10 minutes and then measure its length with a precise instrument suitable for the length we are measuring. The exact details don't really matter for our argument. We already know that it is going to be longer as a result of expansion by heat as a matter of basic scientific fact.
Scrutinizing this simple experiment, we ask;

1- Can anyone do this experiment with an accuracy that would meet the basic scientific standards? The answer is definitely no.  You need to have some basic qualifications in order to be able to perform this experiment.  Namely, you are required to know of how to work with the lab equipment and how to read the measuring devices. 

2- Is the result, that is the length of the expansion of the metal piece, absolutely the same for different experiments by different people? The answer again is negative. They vary within a scientifically defined uncertainty limits.   That is to say, the empirical evidence will show an expansion of length by 5 mm +/- 2% for every 1000 mm length of certain metal nature if heated up by 20 deg, for example. 

3- Is the scientific conclusion of "heat increases the size of a metals" merely based on empirical data? Not really. There is a rational mental process involved which is done in our mind to conclude such a relationship between the heat and enlargement of a metallic object.


This leads us to believe that the main reason we accept an empirical experiment as a fact is essentially because of the general consensus of people having the same experience, which forms a general understanding of how a natural phenomena works and how we can manipulate it to our advantage with some anticipated uncertainty.   

By the same reasoning, I would argue that if different people have similar "personal experiences" on the same subject, the consensus of their rationally processed conclusion is inevitably as credible as a scientific fact supported by "empirical evidence".   By the way of example, if there are many people who claim that when they lie they feel bad and their consensus is lying has negative impact on satisfaction of life then this constitutes a fact of life derived from "personal experience".

Therefore, I would like to conclude that if there is a general consensus by a number of people who have come to a rational conclusion that certain events in their life lead them to believe in God who is running the world at every moment, this can be as credible as a scientific fact.  Hence, it can not be dismissed as a source of human knowledge on the ground that it is derived from "personal experience" rather than "empirical experiment." .

As a matter of fact, faith in its essence is a rational conclusion (reasoning) in light of a collection of empirical data. We observe the world through our senses and the only hypothesis which make sense to us is that there has to be a creator. Therefore, the general consensus on this conclusion is the true sufficient condition for God to exist.

Needless to say, Everyone has the choice to deny all the scientific understandings of the world and to live a life of stone age style depriving themselves from the joys of a modern life. Likewise, it can be can be argued that ignoring the metaphysical nature of the world and the way things work may degrade the quality of our life substantially.

Last but not least, is to acknowledge the fact that the scientific grasp of the world, that is only applicable to nature, usually results in a law of a mathematical nature which helps us quantify the effect of the certain changes with respect to the natural status of things. This is while the in case of the metaphysical laws derived from "personal experience" we can not quantity their effect by some mathematical formula. For example, we can not say how much lie you have to say in order to feel so bad that you would feel so sick that you won't be able to go to work. The same is true about most of the disciplines of arts and humanities. Yet they are indispensable branches of human knowledge.

Quran As a Collection of Evidence That Is Revealed Over Time

There are verses in Quran which must have been barely comprehensible until the modern age when we are equipped with the required knowledge and the technology to explore the world and make sense of the natural phenomena.

The following are a few examples:

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيم

الشَّمْسُ وَالْقَمَرُ بِحُسْبَانٍ

55:5
"The sun and the moon [move] by precise calculation."

14:33

وَسَخَّرَ لَكُمُ الشَّمْسَ وَالْقَمَرَ دَائِبَيْنِ ۖ وَسَخَّرَ لَكُمُ اللَّيْلَ وَالنَّهَارَ

"And He subjected for you the sun and the moon, continuous [in orbit], and subjected for you the night and the day."

25:53

وَهُوَ الَّذِي مَرَجَ الْبَحْرَيْنِ هَٰذَا عَذْبٌ فُرَاتٌ وَهَٰذَا مِلْحٌ أُجَاجٌ وَجَعَلَ بَيْنَهُمَا بَرْزَخًا وَحِجْرًا مَّحْجُورًا

"And it is He who has released [simultaneously] the two seas, one fresh and sweet and one salty and bitter, and He placed between them a barrier and prohibiting partition."
55:19-20

مَرَجَ الْبَحْرَيْنِ يَلْتَقِيَانِ

"He released the two seas, meeting [side by side];"

بَيْنَهُمَا بَرْزَخٌ لَّا يَبْغِيَانِ

"Between them is a barrier [so] neither of them transgresses."

صدق الله العلي العظيم

Quran quotes and translations from Quran.com


And the following two videos can be regarded as a contemporary take on what the above verses of Quran mean today.

https://youtu.be/VEA_mknada0  Earth Without Moon - Full Documentary 2016 - YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUAQy14g0Qc   The Seas not mixing with each other ┇ Quran and Modern Science ┇ IslamSearch.org - YouTube

Considering the fact that it is highly unlikely that people of 1400 years ago could understand such verses to the degree that we can today, by the way of extrapolation we can come to the conclusion that the verses of Quran that seem incomprehensible at our time may be perfectly understood in future. The numerous verses of Quran about "Jinn"  might be good examples of such cases.

This means that in case of verses whose true meaning are apparently hard to grasp at our time, we can not jump to the conclusion that they are meant metaphorically.  Evidently, when human's perception of the world is evolved enough, their true application/meaning will be unveiled to us.

The miraculous nature of Quran is revealed to us as "Personal Experience or Empirical Evidence" which will follow next.

Quranic View About Time in afterlife ?

  While the word "day" has been used in Quran in numerous occasions, there are only a few verses where time is defined for this world and for the one after.

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيم

10:5

هُوَ الَّذِي جَعَلَ الشَّمْسَ ضِيَاءً وَالْقَمَرَ نُورًا وَقَدَّرَهُ مَنَازِلَ لِتَعْلَمُوا عَدَدَ السِّنِينَ وَالْحِسَابَ ۚ مَا خَلَقَ اللَّهُ ذَٰلِكَ إِلَّا بِالْحَقِّ ۚ يُفَصِّلُ الْآيَاتِ لِقَوْمٍ يَعْلَمُونَ

"It is He who made the sun a shining light and the moon a derived light and determined for it phases - that you may know the number of years and account [of time]. Allah has not created this except in truth. He details the signs for a people who know." 

32:5

يُدَبِّرُ الْأَمْرَ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ إِلَى الْأَرْضِ ثُمَّ يَعْرُجُ إِلَيْهِ فِي يَوْمٍ كَانَ مِقْدَارُهُ أَلْفَ سَنَةٍ مِّمَّا تَعُدُّونَ

"He arranges [each] matter from the heaven to the earth; then it will ascend to Him in a Day, the extent of which is a thousand years of those which you count."

22:47

وَيَسْتَعْجِلُونَكَ بِالْعَذَابِ وَلَن يُخْلِفَ اللَّهُ وَعْدَهُ ۚ وَإِنَّ يَوْمًا عِندَ رَبِّكَ كَأَلْفِ سَنَةٍ مِّمَّا تَعُدُّونَ

"And they urge you to hasten the punishment. But Allah will never fail in His promise. And indeed, a day with your Lord is like a thousand years of those which you count."

70:4

تَعْرُجُ الْمَلَائِكَةُ وَالرُّوحُ إِلَيْهِ فِي يَوْمٍ كَانَ مِقْدَارُهُ خَمْسِينَ أَلْفَ سَنَةٍ

"The angels and the Spirit will ascend to Him during a Day the extent of which is fifty thousand years."

صدق الله العلي العظيم

Quran quotes and translations from Quran.com

To begin with, the verse 10:5 explains how majestically the concept of time on earth is created by counting the position of the Sun and the Moon. The other three verses in contrast, introduce a time from God's perspective in comparison with what we know as a day and a year on earth. 

Moreover, these verses suggest that time is, in fact, a byproduct of the specific settings that God has determined for each world.  Therefore, since the settings of our current world, the earthly time based on the movement of the Sun and the Moon, will end when our world ends, then there will be a new standard for time represented by the word "day" which governs the world of afterlife.  This is not to say that the bigger world and the bigger time frame does not exist simultaneously with our solar time. 

Most importantly however, the latter verses prove there will be a concept of time in the afterlife too, which will logically follow that change will still exist in the heavens as time and change are basically interdependent concepts.  This is also consistent with various verses of Quran through which the details of heaven and hell as well as the Resurrection day are pictured.  

We can further learn from Quran that Adam and Eve were living in heaven until they were deceived by Satan. As a result of their sin they were transferred to earth evidently in the same body.  Specific clues in verses such as eating from the tree, clear references to their body parts and what material Adam was created from, would all corroborate this assumption.  Therefore, it follows that the heavens may consist of  the same matter but with different settings. We may call it different laws of nature. 

From another perspective, our spiritual nature requires a constant change, or better say a continuous spiritual elevation just as our body needs food constantly.  This spiritual necessity manifests itself against any repetition which leads to a state of psychological boredom.  I have seen people living in a part of the world, for example, where is famous to be a piece of heaven on earth because of its nice weather, its stunning natural scenery or generally due to its heavenly surroundings but they still get bored by their daily routines and have to travel for a change every now and then.  Complains of mundane chores (lake of excitement of a new experience) is also a well known universal cause for mental frustration which may lead to sever depression.   Perhaps, "necessity of having a new life experience" in the today's culture confirms the same basic spiritual need as part of human nature.  

We can, perhaps, conclude that since we will be revived with the same material body and with the same spiritual nature in afterlife, even residing in heaven for us will not be enjoyable unless it involves some sort of spiritual growth.  Therefore, what we call from earth as "afterlife" may only be another step for us to continue to spiritually develop and get closer to God although each day of the new world is equal to a thousand years as we count on earth. This would also imply that heaven and earth may both be two different path to get to the same ultimate spiritual destination namely God. 

Last but not least, the clarification of time, from heavens' view, can as well explain how God has created the whole universe in 6 days, if that seems too short to us. 

  

Is the Afterlife Resurrection Spiritual or Material?

A number of recent prominent Islamic thinkers believe the resurrection of after life described in Quran is meant to be understood figuratively and not literally. That is, we will come back to life with a spiritual body and our material body will not be restored.

Perhaps this is one of the fundamental questions that all believers may ask God at some point in the evolution of their faith.  That is why, Quran has address this subject as follows:

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيم

2:260

وَإِذْ قَالَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ رَبِّ أَرِنِي كَيْفَ تُحْيِي الْمَوْتَىٰ ۖ قَالَ أَوَلَمْ تُؤْمِن ۖ قَالَ بَلَىٰ وَلَٰكِن لِّيَطْمَئِنَّ قَلْبِي ۖ قَالَ فَخُذْ أَرْبَعَةً مِّنَ الطَّيْرِ فَصُرْهُنَّ إِلَيْكَ ثُمَّ اجْعَلْ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ جَبَلٍ مِّنْهُنَّ جُزْءًا ثُمَّ ادْعُهُنَّ يَأْتِينَكَ سَعْيًا ۚ وَاعْلَمْ أَنَّ اللَّهَ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ

And [mention] when Abraham said, "My Lord, show me how You give life to the dead." [ Allah ] said, "Have you not believed?" He said, "Yes, but [I ask] only that my heart may be satisfied." [ Allah ] said, "Take four birds and commit them to yourself. Then [after slaughtering them] put on each hill a portion of them; then call them - they will come [flying] to you in haste. And know that Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise."

2:59

أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِي حَاجَّ إِبْرَاهِيمَ فِي رَبِّهِ أَنْ آتَاهُ اللَّهُ الْمُلْكَ إِذْ قَالَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ رَبِّيَ الَّذِي يُحْيِي وَيُمِيتُ قَالَ أَنَا أُحْيِي وَأُمِيتُ ۖ قَالَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَأْتِي بِالشَّمْسِ مِنَ الْمَشْرِقِ فَأْتِ بِهَا مِنَ الْمَغْرِبِ فَبُهِتَ الَّذِي كَفَرَ ۗ وَاللَّهُ لَا يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ

Or [consider such an example] as the one who passed by a township which had fallen into ruin. He said, "How will Allah bring this to life after its death?" So Allah caused him to die for a hundred years; then He revived him. He said, "How long have you remained?" The man said, "I have remained a day or part of a day." He said, "Rather, you have remained one hundred years. Look at your food and your drink; it has not changed with time. And look at your donkey; and We will make you a sign for the people. And look at the bones [of this donkey] - how We raise them and then We cover them with flesh." And when it became clear to him, he said, "I know that Allah is over all things competent."

10:45

وَيَوْمَ يَحْشُرُهُمْ كَأَن لَّمْ يَلْبَثُوا إِلَّا سَاعَةً مِّنَ النَّهَارِ يَتَعَارَفُونَ بَيْنَهُمْ ۚ قَدْ خَسِرَ الَّذِينَ كَذَّبُوا بِلِقَاءِ اللَّهِ وَمَا كَانُوا مُهْتَدِينَ

"And on the Day when He will gather them, [it will be] as if they had not remained [in the world] but an hour of the day, [and] they will know each other. Those will have lost who denied the meeting with Allah and were not guided."

صدق الله العلي العظيم

From Quran.com

According to another verse of Quran God knows what is in our heart We can therefore, understand that the verse 2:260 is directly addressing the same concern of all humans namely how God can revive a dead?  It is not a blasphemy to ask God an honest question as Abraham did. This verse also proves that God will never ignore our doubts and questions if we are really keen to know the answer. We however,  tend to avoid a direct conversation with God, most of us at least.

This is mainly because if we are answered and it becomes clear to us that God has somehow answered us, then it will become our responsibility to either testify the truth or to deny it.  Each choice will bring about huge consequences in our life, which we mostly rather to avoid.  I believe, most of us, can not believe and do not want to believe that every ordinary human can enter a direct conversation with God. Perhaps, that is one of the qualities that make us different from a prophet.

That said, God's answer to our doubt on resurrection clarifies that our material body will be restored with its appearance before death. The verse 2:260 also implies that our body will be revived in a way that it will have full functionality since the revived birds could fly back to Abraham.

God must be a perfect philosopher too as he has also addressed this subject from another perspective. In verse 2:59, a believer who is passing by the remains of an ancient village  asks God how he can revive them.   " So Allah caused him to die for a hundred years; then He revived him. ....." , Which is a beautiful story and self explanatory.

Thirdly, verse 10:45 states that when people are revived after life they recognize each other.  This can only be possible if we are resurrected in our material body that we have lived in over our life on earth where we get to know others. Otherwise we will not be able to identify our acquaintances by their soul.

Lastly, while it is understandable that interpreting the Resurrection day as merely spiritual may be a solution to some apparently incomprehensible descriptions of heaven and hell, it seems clearly contrary to the above mentioned verses of Quran.  Hence reducing resurrection day to only spiritual revival can not be the truth.

Does Quran Instruct to Cut off a Thief's Hand?

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيم

وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِنَ اللَّـهِ ۗ وَاللَّـهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ

5:38  "the thief, the male and the female, amputate their hands in recompense for what they committed as a deterrent [punishment] from Allah. And Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise.'

فَمَنْ تَابَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ظُلْمِهِ وَأَصْلَحَ فَإِنَّ اللَّـهَ يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِ ۗ إِنَّ اللَّـهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ

5:39 "But whoever repents after his wrongdoing and reforms, indeed, Allah will turn to him in forgiveness. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."

                                                                  صدق الله العلي العظيم

The first verse above constitute one of the often heard controversies about Quran as it,  apparently, orders a clearly sever punishment for the crime of theft.  

I should say that I spent quite some time thinking about this verse since it did not make much sense to me to apply one fixed punishment regardless of the scale of the theft. That is to say, it seems that there is no difference between a petty theft or a large size steeling for cutting off the thief's hand, which does not seem reasonable. 

Looking for other situations in Quran where the words "cutting and hand" are used together, we find the verse 12:31 which narrates part of the story of Joseph when the "first lady" of the time is blamed by the other women in the city for seeking to seduce a slave. Defending herself, she invites the women to a room giving each a knife and some fruit. Then she asks Joseph to walk into the room while the women were peeling their fruits and this is what happens:

فَلَمَّا سَمِعَتْ بِمَكْرِهِنَّ أَرْسَلَتْ إِلَيْهِنَّ وَأَعْتَدَتْ لَهُنَّ مُتَّكَأً وَآتَتْ كُلَّ وَاحِدَةٍ مِّنْهُنَّ سِكِّينًا وَقَالَتِ اخْرُجْ عَلَيْهِنَّ ۖ فَلَمَّا رَأَيْنَهُ أَكْبَرْنَهُ وَقَطَّعْنَ أَيْدِيَهُنَّ وَقُلْنَ حَاشَ لِلَّهِ مَا هَٰذَا بَشَرًا إِنْ هَٰذَا إِلَّا مَلَكٌ كَرِيمٌ

"So when she heard of their scheming, she sent for them and prepared for them a banquet and gave each one of them a knife and said [to Joseph], "Come out before them." And when they saw him, they greatly admired him and cut their hands and said, "Perfect is Allah ! This is not a man; this is none but a noble angel."

Skipping all the lessons that the beautiful story of Joseph entails, the context of this verse can define the phrase "cutting their hand".  That is cutting the skin of their finger or of their hand as it is the only conceivable event that may happen to any one using a knife in a similar situation.

It however, can be equally argued that in verse 5:33 the same combination of words has been used in a very different context of a battle field, where it could most likely be understood as cutting off a hand or a leg of those who fight against God or his messenger in a war.

Based on these two verses (12:31 & 5:33), I acknowledge the fact that the phrase "cutting hand" can have both meanings, inferring from the two situations discussed.  That is, it can mean cutting the skin of a finger or it can also mean cutting off a whole finger/ hand. Particularly because it is mentioned as a punishment for what a thief has acquired.  Therefore, we can not apply this verse if we only consider this phrase semantically.

Perhaps what can shed light on this case, is paying attention to the absence of any scale for this punishment, bearing in mind that God commandments are to save lives and are to elevate our way of life. That is to say, logically it makes no sense to have the same punishment for a petty theft and for a large scale steeling, embezzling a large some of money for example.  Hence, it is sensible to assume that we can only apply this punishment for the largest scale of steeling for which in many countries currently death penalty is given.

From this perspective, this verse 12:31 is actually setting up the most severe punishment for the crime of theft as opposed to being their first penalty.  There have been many people in recent years (or perhaps at all times) who were sentenced to death because of the huge amounts of money that they took from government or from the so called "public money"  while Quran is telling us the penalty for theft with largest scale of anytime is cutting off a hand not death penalty.   I have no doubt those who lost their lives because of their monetary crimes would have been more than happy if they had lost a finger or a hand instead.

I believe, in this way the verse 12:31 not only will save life but it will also be a reasonable punishment that would deter similar crimes, which could potentially devastate a large number of people, and can improve human's communal life.