Scientific interpretation of the Qur’an, particularly the interpretation of verses concerning the heavens and celestial phenomena, represents one of the most significant and challenging areas of interdisciplinary research at the intersection of Qur’anic studies and the natural sciences. The Qur’an contains numerous references to the heavens, celestial bodies, cosmic order, the creation of the universe, and other phenomena that have attracted the attention of exegetes throughout the history of Islamic scholarship. In the modern period, the rapid development of the natural sciences has encouraged a growing tendency to interpret such verses in light of contemporary scientific theories and discoveries. Although this approach can contribute to a deeper understanding of certain dimensions of the Qur’anic text, its uncritical application has also generated a number of methodological problems, interpretive inconsistencies, and instances of unwarranted scientific correspondence. The present study aims to identify, categorize, and critically analyze the major methodological pathologies in the scientific interpretation of the Qur’an, with particular emphasis on verses related to the heavens, from the perspective of critics of scientific exegesis.



The study employs a descriptive-analytical approach and relies primarily on library-based research. Relevant exegetical works, methodological discussions, and critical studies concerning the relationship between Qur’anic interpretation and the natural sciences are examined, compared, and systematically categorized. Particular attention is given to interpretive examples in which scientific concepts have been employed to explain celestial verses, in order to distinguish methodologically sound interpretations from approaches based on speculative or inadequate assumptions.



The findings indicate that the methodological problems associated with scientific exegesis can be classified into several principal categories. These include the premature identification of Qur’anic verses with provisional or changing scientific theories; selective interpretation of textual evidence in order to confirm preconceived scientific claims; the imposition of scientific findings upon the Qur’anic text rather than allowing the text to determine the scope of interpretation; neglect of linguistic context, semantic possibilities, rhetorical features, and literary structure; insufficient consideration of the historical and exegetical context of verses; and failure to recognize the distinction between the Qur’an’s primary guidance-oriented objectives and the descriptive function of scientific knowledge. Other significant problems include inadequate engagement with authoritative exegetical and tradition-based sources, reliance on weak, unverified, or outdated scientific reports, exaggeration in attributing modern scientific discoveries to Qur’anic verses, and failure to distinguish between empirically established scientific facts, dominant scientific models, and hypotheses that remain subject to revision.



Furthermore, the study identifies the neglect of the Qur’an’s internal interpretive capacities as an important methodological deficiency. Some apparent tensions between Qur’anic statements and scientific findings may be reconsidered through the examination of related verses, linguistic relationships, contextual indicators, and the broader conceptual framework of the Qur’an itself, without resorting immediately to external scientific interpretations. The findings also demonstrate that many disagreements and erroneous interpretations concerning celestial verses do not necessarily originate from the subject matter itself; rather, they frequently result from weaknesses in the principles, assumptions, and procedures employed by interpreters.



Accordingly, a scientifically informed interpretation of the Qur’an requires a balanced and disciplined methodology that respects both the integrity of the Qur’anic text and the epistemological status of scientific knowledge. Such an approach should prioritize linguistic and contextual analysis, make appropriate use of established exegetical and traditional sources, distinguish clearly between scientific certainties and provisional theories, and avoid forcing contemporary scientific concepts onto verses whose meanings may extend beyond particular scientific models. The study concludes that adherence to these methodological principles can contribute to the development of a more coherent, credible, and systematic framework for scientific exegesis, while preventing the Qur’anic text from becoming dependent upon transient or revisable scientific theories.