Embryology

1« Previous thread | Next thread »
- kutta
- Pub Regular
- offline
Embryology
OP - February 05, 2013, 03:12 PM

Hi, I have seen many strong arguments that support the notion that the embryology "miracles" in the Qur'aan are not really miracles.

However, I am tired of seeing the same old argument about Mohammed plagiarizing from Aristotle or Galen. I mean, is there any proof at all that he even had contact with any of their works? Plus, even if he did know about their works, why didn't he copy his other works that talk about a variety of other fields in science? I'm sorry, it just doesn't seem to be an effective argument to me. Any insights?
- e-raja
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Embryology
Reply #1 - February 05, 2013, 03:22 PM

Its not that he copied, the claim muslims make is that this knowledge and description of embryology could not have possibly been known at the time. Thats where galen and aristotle come in. Mohammed was a merchant and must have come across medical practitioners who relied on greek medicine. Also there are numerous hadith that state the prophet possibly knew what a fetus looked like, its not a stretch to say he described what he saw. It always come down to how could he know, well there are plenty of ways he knew which does not include God told him. Just because hadith make the claim only god could have known doesn't mean thats true because hadith hearsay and propaganda afterall
- dr_sloth
- Pub Regular
- Orthodox Atheist
- offline
Embryology
Reply #2 - February 05, 2013, 03:54 PM

it really annoys me when muslims ask me to prove that he copied from Galen. They are completely missing the point.
If Galen, or ANYBODY said the same thing, then either Muslims will have to proclaim Galen as a prophet, or they will have to admit that this information does not require divine revelation.
- kutta
- Pub Regular
- offline
Embryology
Reply #3 - February 05, 2013, 04:14 PM

Yes, I agree. It definitely does not prove that divine revelation is involved, for sure. Personally, the fact that an All-Knowing God could have easily wrote a much more clear verse if He wanted to share His divine knowledge instead of relying on vague interpretations that don't fit scholarly consensus or the context, is enough for me.
However, I just wanted to focus on the plagiarism claims.
Do you agree that there is no way of categorically proving that he may have borrowed or known Galen/Aristotle/*insert another Greek scientist (I've heard many other names) works, nor vice versa?
- e-raja
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Embryology
Reply #4 - February 05, 2013, 04:36 PM

Quote
Do you agree that there is no way of categorically proving that he may have borrowed or known Galen/Aristotle/*insert another Greek scientist (I've heard many other names) works, nor vice versa?

there is also know way of proving that he didn't borrow from these sources, so the claim muslims make about his access to this information becomes redundant. They will point to islamic history but that is all pretty much conjecture.
- kutta
- Pub Regular
- offline
Embryology
Reply #5 - February 05, 2013, 04:52 PM

yeah, i know sorry, that's why i said vice versa, so i guess the bottomline is that there's not enough evidence to prove its a miracle. thanks though e-raja, i see your point now.
- dr_sloth
- Pub Regular
- Orthodox Atheist
- offline
Embryology
Reply #6 - February 05, 2013, 06:11 PM

Quote
the bottomline is that there's not enough evidence to prove its a miracle.

but there is enough evidence to prove that a miracle is not required, and that is all we need to do.
As for plagiarism, I wouldn't argue that he copied Galen. At least not directly. Nobody could accuse Muhammed of being well read. However, if Galen's ideas were floating around, we can still ascribe Galen as the source of the information.
- moi
- Pub Regular
- offline
Embryology
Reply #7 - February 05, 2013, 07:10 PM

These were definitely very well known ideas, and they still are!

For example, modesty and covering hair ia actually about:

Quote
Paul: Female hair too sexy to go unveiled

The apostle Paul wanted women to cover their tresses while praying because he — like the rest of Hellenistic culture then — believed that the long hair of adult females was the sexual equivalent of male testicles, according to a newly published study.

Citing writings from Aristotle, Euripedes and the disciples of Hippocrates, the "father of medicine," Troy W. Martin of St. Xavier University in Chicago said that Paul reflected the physiology of his time in believing that the hair of adult women "is part of female genitalia." Martin's article appears in the spring issue of the Journal of Biblical Literature.

http://sbl-site.org/publications/article.aspx?articleId=271

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/jun/01/darwins-ghosts-rebecca-stott-review

Quote
There may be no such thing as originality. In the fourth edition of On the Origin of Species, Charles Darwin added a historical sketch to recognise those he considered had anticipated his great evolutionary idea

Maybe we need to formally reference the koran?

When you are a Bear of Very Little Brain, and you Think of Things, you find sometimes that a Thing which seemed very Thingish inside you is quite different when it gets out into the open and has other people looking at it.

A.A. Milne,

"We cannot slaughter each other out of the human impasse"
- captndisguise
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Embryology
Reply #8 - February 05, 2013, 07:30 PM

Hey, take a look at this post. One doesn't have to have detailed knowledge of Aristotle or Galen or direct contact with their works to scribble the kind of vague yet erroneous statements found in the Quran

http://embryologyinthequran.blogspot.com/2012/08/ii-muhammads-plagiarism-hamzas-bad.html

http://www.youtube.com/captaindisguise
http://captaindisguise.blogspot.com/
http://dawahganda.blogspot.com/
https://twitter.com/CaptainDG64

"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies" ~ Nietzsche
- froclais
- Wanderer
- Member
- offline
Embryology
Reply #9 - February 05, 2013, 07:34 PM

Dr. Martin's full article in full:

http://paul.mcnabbs.org/religion/JBL-paul.pdf

FreeThought Wiki is looking for translators!

Current projects: Faraj Foda's "al-Haqiqa al Ghaib" (Arabic) and Turan Dursun's "Din Bu I" (Turkish)
- moi
- Pub Regular
- offline
Embryology
Reply #10 - February 05, 2013, 08:44 PM

Thank you! Please read that everyone!

When you are a Bear of Very Little Brain, and you Think of Things, you find sometimes that a Thing which seemed very Thingish inside you is quite different when it gets out into the open and has other people looking at it.

A.A. Milne,

"We cannot slaughter each other out of the human impasse"
- kutta
- Pub Regular
- offline
Embryology
Reply #11 - February 05, 2013, 09:07 PM

wow, captaindisguise, that was a very interesting blog. It does appear that the scholarly consensus leans towards the interpretation that blood clot is the word's actual meaning, atleast in its context. Even if the correct interpretation is a hanging/sticking thing, it would still be vague, and it would still confirm the fact that people like Hamza are just picking whatever interpretation suits them, haha!

It is even more IRONIC that the Qur'aan hates this behaviour itself (picking whatever interpretation is comfortable to them)
"It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammad], the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise - they are the foundation of the Book - and others unspecific. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah . But those firm in knowledge say, "We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord." And no one will be reminded except those of understanding." (Surah 3:7)

Would you mind explaining the implantation part, without complex biological terms, since I do not understand the point, nor am I an expert in biology :$ Also, do you know who comes up with the meanings of the arabic words themselves? Sorry, I may be asking too many questions, but answers would be very beneficial
- captndisguise
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Embryology
Reply #12 - February 05, 2013, 09:54 PM

Quote from: kutta on February 05, 2013, 09:07 PM
wow, captaindisguise, that was a very interesting blog. It does appear that the scholarly consensus leans towards the interpretation that blood clot is the word's actual meaning, atleast in its context. Even if the correct interpretation is a hanging/sticking thing, it would still be vague, and it would still confirm the fact that people like Hamza are just picking whatever interpretation suits them, haha!

Also, it can be pointed out that it is unlikely that an almighty God would choose the one word that has the specific biological meaning that would contradict science. There were many ways for God to describe hanging or tubular shaped etc but instead he went with the one word that also means "blood clot", esp. when the "blood clot" definition was accepted view of embryology before and after the Quran. Sounds unreasonable for an all knowing God.

Quote from: kutta on February 05, 2013, 09:07 PM

Would you mind explaining the implantation part, without complex biological terms, since I do not understand the point, nor am I an expert in biology :$ Also, do you know who comes up with the meanings of the arabic words themselves? Sorry, I may be asking too many questions, but answers would be very beneficial

Implantation is actually simple, it is exactly what the word suggest. After the egg is fertillized, it divides into multiple cells and at a certain stages, it becomes fixed/embedded in the inner wall of the uterus. That is all

Muslim apologists come up with these. Quite clearly, there is a profitable industry for people with no integrity to go in, where they claim or retrofit scientific definitions on to ancient meanings. In the case of implantation, the quran simply says the seminal fluid is in "a safe place"; the "safe place" is then reinterpreted to mean the uterine wall. That is how it goes and a good chunk of the gullible muslim community will happily buy into it.

http://www.youtube.com/captaindisguise
http://captaindisguise.blogspot.com/
http://dawahganda.blogspot.com/
https://twitter.com/CaptainDG64

"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies" ~ Nietzsche
- kutta
- Pub Regular
- offline
Embryology
Reply #13 - February 05, 2013, 10:19 PM

Wow, I must admit I love your insights.
Anyways, I went through your blog and found out that you have only done two miracle refutations so far, which by the way were absolutely AMAZING. do you think it is possible for me to help you with the rest of them? I do not have the best writing skills, but I believe I can provide good, sufficient, and reasonable evidences to refute the rest of the apologist claims. Of course, you can then edit my rough pieces and refine them as you wish. Your blog will become a very important tool not only for present and future ex-Muslims, but also for Muslims that doubt, great idea!
- captndisguise
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Embryology
Reply #14 - February 05, 2013, 10:31 PM

Quote from: kutta on February 05, 2013, 10:19 PM
do you think it is possible for me to help you with the rest of them? ... Your blog will become a very important tool not only for present and future ex-Muslims, but also for Muslims that doubt, great idea!

Absolutely. I am in the process of setting up a team to work on the following site dedicated to debunking these claims,

http://quranmiraclesrefuted.blogspot.com/

I will send you a private message with contact info

http://www.youtube.com/captaindisguise
http://captaindisguise.blogspot.com/
http://dawahganda.blogspot.com/
https://twitter.com/CaptainDG64

"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies" ~ Nietzsche
- dr_sloth
- Pub Regular
- Orthodox Atheist
- offline
Embryology
Reply #15 - February 05, 2013, 10:47 PM

I would like to offer my services captain
1« Previous thread | Next thread »