PEACE Timbs thanks for the reply...Glad I could spark your interest ....Thats why we all post in KTL...PeacecaeP
Printable View
PEACE Timbs thanks for the reply...Glad I could spark your interest ....Thats why we all post in KTL...PeacecaeP
In the Holy Koran there is a verse where Allah “God” speaks about the stages of man's embryonic development.
{We created man from an extract of clay. Settlement, firmly fixed. Then we made the drop into an alaqa (leech, suspended thing, and blood clot), then we made the alaqa into a mudghah (chewed substance)...} (Koran, 23:12-14)
Literally, the Arabic word alaqah has three meanings:
(1) leech, (2) suspended thing, and (3) blood clot.
In comparing a leech to an embryo in the alaqah stage, we find similarity between the two, 2 as we can see in figure 1. Also,the embryo at this stage obtains nourishment from the blood of the mother,similar to the leech,which feeds on the blood of others.
The second meaning of the word alaqah is “suspended thing”. This is what we can see in figure 2 and 3 , the suspension of the embryo, during the alaqah stage, in the womb of the mother.
http://up5.w6w.net/upload/16-04-2006...48d9be24e1.gif
http://up5.w6w.net/upload/15-04-2006...44c1fe85b8.gif
The third meaning of the word alaqah is “blood clot.” We find that the external appearance of the embryo and its sacs during the alaqah stage is similar to that of a blood clot. This is due to the presence of relatively large amounts of blood present in the embryo during this stage (see figure 4). Also during this stage, the blood in the embryo doesn't circulate until the end of the third week Thus, the embryo at this stage is like a clot of blood.
http://up5.w6w.net/upload/15-04-2006...0774c69ead.gif
So the three meanings of the word alaqah correspond accurately to the descriptions of the embryo at the alaqah stage.
The next stage mentioned in the verse is mudghah stage. The Arabic word mudghah means “chewed substance.” If one were to take a piece of gum and chew it in his or her mouth and then compare it to with an embryo at the mudghah stage, we would conclude that the embryo at the mudghah stage is similar in appearance to a chewed substance. This is because of the somites at the back of the embryo that “somewhat resemble teethmarks in a chewed substance” (see figure 5 and 6)
http://up5.w6w.net/upload/15-04-2006...5176d38aa8.gif
http://up5.w6w.net/upload/15-04-2006...432902ac56.gif
How could prophet Muhammad – may Allah's peace be upon him- have possibly known all this about fourteen hundred ago, when scientists have only recently discovered this using advanced equipment and powerful microscope which did not exist at that time? Hamm and Leeuwenhoek were the first scientists to observe the human sperm cells (spermatozoa) using an improved microscope in 1677 (more than 1000 years after prophet Muhammad -may Allah's peace be upon him-). They mistakenly thought that the sperm cell contained a miniature performed human being that grew when it was deposited in the female genital tract.
Professor Emeritus Keith L. Moore is one of the world's most prominent scientists in the field of anatomy and embryology and the author of the book entitled The developing Human, which has been translated into eight languages. This book is a scientific reference work and was chosen by a special committee in the United States as the best book authored by one person. Dr. Keith Moore is a professor Emeritus of Anatomy and Cell Biology at the University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. There, he was Associate Dean of Basic Sciences at the Faculty of Medicine and for 8 years was the Chairman of the Department of the Anatomy. In 1984, he received the most distinguished award presented in the field of anatomy in Canada, the J.C.B Grant Award from the Canadian Association of Anatomists. He has directed many international Associations, such as the Canadian and the American Association of Anatomists and the Council of the Union of the Biological Sciences.
In 1981, during the seventh Medical Conference in Dammam, Saudi Arabia, Professor Moore said: “It has been a great pleasure for me to help clarify statements from Koran about human development. It is clear to me that these statements must have come to Muhammad from God, because almost all of this knowledge was not discovered until many centuries later. This proves to me that Muhammad must have been a messenger of God”
Consequently, professor Moore was aksed the following question: “Does this mean that you believe that the Koran is the word of God?” He replied: “I find no difficulty accepting this.”
During one conference, Professor Moore stated: “....Because the staging of human embryo is complex, owing to the continuous process of change during development, it is proposed that a new system of classification could be developed using the terms mentioned in the Koran and “sunnah”(what Muhammad said,did, or approved of). The proposed system is simple, comprehensive, and conforms with present embryological knowledge. The intensive studies of the Koran and hadeeth ( reliably transmitted reports by the prophet Muhammad's companions of what he said, did or approved of) in the last four years have revealed system for classifying human embryos that is amazing since it was recorded in the seventh century A.D. Although Aristotle, the founder of the science of embryology, realized that chick embryos developed in stages from his studies of hen's eggs in the fourth century B.C., he did not give any details about these stages. As far as it is known from the history of embryology, little was known about the staging and the classification of human embryos until the twentieth century. For this reason, the descriptions of the human embryos in the Koran can not be based on scientific knowledge in the seventh century. The only reasonable conclusion is: these descriptions were revealed to Muhammad from God. He could not have known such details because he was an illiterate man with absolutely no scientific training.” and he was known among his people for being honest, modest, truthful and trusty.
i think this pretty much sums it up
Quote:
Originally Posted by My First Timbs
just because u dont understand how muhammed knew stuff back then, how does that translate to "allah taught him"Quote:
sista,
its actually very easy and simple
as long as one has a rational argument that can be verified and substantiated by positive evidence (not a lack of evidence) , then u dont have to worry about being subjective.
i still havent addressed your post above
but in a nutshell, your claims are of the type
"I dont know the answer to _______, thus there is a possibility of it being due to ________" ... thats irrational (its called an argument from ignorance)
another form of this type of reasoning is:
" ______ seems inexplicable, thus it has to be a result of _______"
you cant base your stance and argument on a lack of evidence.
How can an illiterate man doesn’t know how to read and to write, know things of this nature?
Science was the last thing on his people’s mind at the time.
Even if I assumed that they were interested in science, It would have been such basic things not things that could’ve been known only these days.
That’s how it’s translated to “Allah taught him”
plus,
check the Koran for more info
I believe in God but don't doubt the wisdom of the ancients. We're still not sure how they managed to build the pyramids in Egypt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweet sista
no
thats how its translates into
"you dont know how they knew it"
my goodness!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaemillz
okay why don't YOU tell me how they knew it?!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Unseen
i don't doubt the wisdom of the ancients at all. as a matter of fact, i believe that every civilization was good at something. however,they were great in kinda specific major. No one can be good at everything!
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweet sista
u still dont understand logic do ya?
the issue isnt about me proving or answering how they knew it !
the issue is whether u or anyone else can PROVE that it was ALLAH who inspired them!
how old are u?
^ lmao...I have been wondering about her age, also.
Just because it seems like she is real young.
i had fun with her in the past.. then i gave up :(
who shot JFK, ive been wondering that for yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeears
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...q=loose+change
Do u believe is this?
has nothing to do with JFK
doesnt???? u sure???