PDA

View Full Version : Virgin Mary's Miracle birth to Isa (RA) - Scientifically Impossible?



beespreeteam
05-27-2007, 01:10 AM
http://beespree.com/story.php?title=Virgin...ally_impossible

It's taken six years to find out but the zookeepers at Henry Doorly Zoo in Nebraska finally know how the female hammerhead shark that was in their care managed to get pregnant on her own. Scientists revealed last week that DNA profiling showed the shark's baby contained no paternal DNA.
There's comments in the description in the link before you nagivate to the actual site, so check it out :)
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Woodrow
05-27-2007, 01:27 AM
Originally Posted by beespreeteam
http://beespree.com/story.php?title=Virgin...ally_impossible



There's comments in the description in the link before you nagivate to the actual site, so check it out :)
Pathogenesis is actually fairly common among fish and amphibians. This in no way detracts from the miracle of Isa(as)'s birth as Isa(as) is the only human to have been born of a virgin.
Reply

beespreeteam
05-27-2007, 01:36 AM
Originally Posted by Woodrow
Pathogenesis is actually fairly common among fish and amphibians. This in no way detracts from the miracle of Isa(as)'s birth as Isa(as) is the only human to have been born of a virgin.
I'm interested. Does the Quran indicate that it was a one-off, or that it's impossible and could never happen in a human again?

I like the two sides to this.

btw, I didn't mean the user-submitted comments at the bottom, I meant the actual summarized view of the person that submitted the article, and anyone can view that you dont need to register
Reply

Philosopher
05-27-2007, 01:39 AM
No, it is not scientifically possible. Pathogenesis never happened with mammals.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Woodrow
05-27-2007, 01:48 AM
there does seem to be an error in one of the intro comments.

Perhaps science will slowly bring these reasons to light. Who knows, but this recent evidence (parthenogenesis in a mammal) may serve as a good read for those who scoff at the 'scientific impossibility' of Virgin Mary's (Maryam[RA]) miracle birth to Isa[A] (Jesus).
A shark is a fish and is not a mammal.

Scientifically pathogenesis is possible in a human, but we have yet to find any mechanism that would cause it to occur and there does not appear to be any natural means for it to occur. Pathogenesis has been induced in Rabbits and several other small mammals. I won't go into detail, but I doubt the rabbit was in favor of it and
I do not see it occuring naturaly.

The interesting thing about the birth of Isa(as) is that he is male. The result of any natural pathogenesis has to be female as no male chromosomes are involved. so, even if parthogenesis were a routine event in humans, the birth of Isa(as) would still be a miracle.
Reply

Woodrow
05-27-2007, 01:55 AM
Originally Posted by Philosopher
No, it is not scientifically possible. Pathogenesis never happened with mammals.
In 1900 Jacques Loeb accomplished the first clear case of artificial parthenogenesis when he pricked unfertilized frog eggs with a needle and found that in some cases normal embryonic development ensued. In 1936 Gregory Pincus induced parthenogenesis in mammalian (rabbit) eggs by temperature change and chemical agents. Artificial parthenogenesis has since been achieved in almost all major groups of animals, by mechanical, chemical, and electrical means, though it usually results in incomplete and abnormal development.
Source: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/sex2.htm
Reply

Philosopher
05-27-2007, 01:56 AM
Originally Posted by Woodrow
there does seem to be an error in one of the intro comments.



A shark is a fish and is not a mammal.

Scientifically pathogenesis is possible in a human, but we have yet to find any mechanism that would cause it to occur and there does not appear to be any natural means for it to occur. Pathogenesis has been induced in Rabbits and several other small mammals. I won't go into detail, but I doubt the rabbit was in favor of it and
I do not see it occuring naturaly.

The interesting thing about the birth of Isa(as) is that he is male. The result of any natural pathogenesis has to be female as no male chromosomes are involved. so, even if parthogenesis were a routine event in humans, the birth of Isa(as) would still be a miracle.
The virgin birth is not a new concept. Christianity stole it from past pagan religions.

http://www.entheology.org/POCM/pagan...gin_birth.html

http://home.earthlink.net/~pgwhacker/ChristianOrigins/
Reply

beespreeteam
05-27-2007, 02:01 AM
thanks for replies

interesting!
Reply

Philosopher
05-27-2007, 02:06 AM
Originally Posted by Woodrow
Even if we assume that the virgin birth is possible with humans, it is very unlikely that the offspring would live over 30 years. Most offsprings observed died soon after birth. The virgin birth was copied from past pagan traditions.
Reply

Woodrow
05-27-2007, 02:09 AM
Originally Posted by Philosopher
The virgin birth is not a new concept. Christianity stole it from past pagan religions.

http://www.entheology.org/POCM/pagan...gin_birth.html

http://home.earthlink.net/~pgwhacker/ChristianOrigins/
At one time I also believed that.

Keep in mind that as a Muslim I also believe it did occur with Isa(as).

I am very much aware of the pagan concepts of it happening and am also aware that until the advent of explorers some Polynesian Islanders were unaware as to how pregnancy occurred and that they believed it was a spontaneous event that occurred in women.

Those stories and beliefs have no bearing on the Birth of Isa(as) as that particular birth was accompanied by other miracles along with an advance announcement through an Angel.
Reply

Philosopher
05-27-2007, 02:34 AM
Originally Posted by Woodrow
At one time I also believed that.

Keep in mind that as a Muslim I also believe it did occur with Isa(as).

I am very much aware of the pagan concepts of it happening and am also aware that until the advent of explorers some Polynesian Islanders were unaware as to how pregnancy occurred and that they believed it was a spontaneous event that occurred in women.

Those stories and beliefs have no bearing on the Birth of Isa(as) as that particular birth was accompanied by other miracles along with an advance announcement through an Angel.
So because you're a Muslim now, the virgin birth is valid??
Reply

beespreeteam
05-27-2007, 02:44 AM
Lol, stop trolling.

Anyway, the main point was basically it's a good read for those who keep thinking science totally disproves religion - you don't know what's around the corner.

What if it starts naturally happening in Mammals (due to changes in the environment, such as those that led to it happening in the Shark)?

We never know, and it's possible we'll never know.

And Allah knows best.
Reply

Strzelecki
05-27-2007, 07:13 AM
Originally Posted by Philosopher
So because you're a Muslim now, the virgin birth is valid??
Umm, dude.
I think Woodrow's conversion in itself says he believes that the virgin birth is valid.
In fact I think he said it ealier in this thread.
Originally Posted by Woodrow
Keep in mind that as a Muslim I also believe it did occur with Isa(as).
Ahh yep! There it is. :P

[I'm not saying Woodrow ever did reject the concept of virgin birth before he converted but...]
Even though someone may have rejected the concept of virgin birth in the past does not mean that things cannot change. :)
Reply

abdussattar
09-02-2010, 04:04 AM
Intresting! science co-incides with so many aspects of quraan!
Reply

جوري
09-02-2010, 05:29 AM
philosopher was indeed a troll.. atheists are all so up in your face about the impossibility of this and the impossibility of that but so colorful when it comes to the origins of life where allegedly no 'mother' or 'father' to get the process going but a lake with some shady ingredients, a cloud, some miasma and a sprinkle of sunshine et voila life in a perpetual fashion, and a very forward direction...

as sick I am of them as I am of the other hateful heathens!
Reply

Alpha Dude
09-02-2010, 01:10 PM
but so colorful when it comes to the origins of life where allegedly no 'mother' or 'father' to get the process going but a lake with some shady ingredients, a cloud, some miasma and a sprinkle of sunshine et voila life in a perpetual fashion, and a very forward direction...
Lol. Hilarious double standard, right?

They'd probably come out and say something like 'well, science is ever evolving and doesn't say it has the answer to everything unlike religion blah blah'. The fact remains, though, that their position is just based on nothing but blind hope.

I reckon most atheists are just insecure about their faith, that's why they are so cynical and troll-like. They also like to feign intellectualness.
Reply

atheistbynature
09-02-2010, 03:55 PM
Lol. Hilarious double standard, right?
It's not double standards at all. 'Virgin birth' amongst humans is observed to be impossible and there is no proof it did ever happen. Abiogenesis is an hypothesis to explain the origin of life, it has not yet been proven. But saying that it is a possible explanation and waiting for more evidence is much more valid than believing something 100% when there's not only no evidence but it's proven impossible by all current observations.

I reckon most atheists are just insecure about their faith, that's why they are so cynical and troll-like. They also like to feign intellectualness.
That's just irrelevant ad hominem attacks.
Reply

جوري
09-02-2010, 04:09 PM
Originally Posted by Bedouin
Lol. Hilarious double standard, right?

They'd probably come out and say something like 'well, science is ever evolving and doesn't say it has the answer to everything unlike religion blah blah'. The fact remains, though, that their position is just based on nothing but blind hope.

I reckon most atheists are just insecure about their faith, that's why they are so cynical and troll-like. They also like to feign intellectualness.
agreed ...........
further not only are their own 'theories' not observed, they are equally impossible to replicate or prove, and the saddest part is classifying it under science rather than faith!
:w:
Reply

Alpha Dude
09-02-2010, 04:12 PM
'Virgin birth' amongst humans is observed to be impossible and there is no proof it did ever happen.
i. I wasn't referring to virgin birth. Rather atheists in general.
ii. Virgin birth is impossible in the absence of a miracle. Hence why it is regarded as such. No hard to understand, really.

But saying that it is a possible exlanation and waiting for more evidence is much more valid than believing something 100% when there's not only no evidence but it's proven impossible by all current observations.
Failure to understand simple concept. Read up the definition of 'miracle', please.

That's just irrelevant ad hominem attacks.
I disagree. It's more of a 'hypothesis' that explains the behaviour of atheists.

Just that this hypothesis has not been proven conclusively as of yet. Hopefully in future my theory that atheists are insecure, cynical and troll-like will be established firmly.

I mean, surely we don't need to be certain about something before we promote and argue against everything else so vehemently..
Reply

Trumble
09-02-2010, 04:34 PM
Originally Posted by Bedouin
Just that this hypothesis has not been proven conclusively as of yet. Hopefully in future my theory that atheists are insecure, cynical and troll-like will be established firmly.
Try not to forget "feign intellectualness", hmm ?... :rolleyes:
Reply

جوري
09-02-2010, 04:36 PM
Originally Posted by Trumble
Try not to forget "feign intellectualness", hmm ?... :rolleyes:
well that is a given, there is no point to being redundant!

all the best
Reply

atheistbynature
09-02-2010, 05:07 PM
Originally Posted by Bedouin
i. I wasn't referring to virgin birth. Rather atheists in general.
ii. Virgin birth is impossible in the absence of a miracle. Hence why it is regarded as such. No hard to understand, really.


Failure to understand simple concept. Read up the definition of 'miracle', please.

I disagree. It's more of a 'hypothesis' that explains the behaviour of atheists.

Just that this hypothesis has not been proven conclusively as of yet. Hopefully in future my theory that atheists are insecure, cynical and troll-like will be established firmly.

I mean, surely we don't need to be certain about something before we promote and argue against everything else so vehemently..
I don't see how saying it was a miracle helps you still believe it 100% without evidence for the event happening. And I don't argue vehemently that abiogenasis happened.
Reply

Zafran
09-02-2010, 05:08 PM
Originally Posted by atheistbynature
It's not double standards at all. 'Virgin birth' amongst humans is observed to be impossible and there is no proof it did ever happen. Abiogenesis is an hypothesis to explain the origin of life, it has not yet been proven. But saying that it is a possible explanation and waiting for more evidence is much more valid than believing something 100% when there's not only no evidence but it's proven impossible by all current observations.
Ah yes the good old inductive circular reasoning. By the way whats the "proof" that its never happend in the past? I'm sure we cant prove that by empirical evidence?
Reply

جوري
09-02-2010, 05:12 PM
Originally Posted by atheistbynature
I don't see how saying it was a miracle helps you still believe it 100% without evidence for the event happening. And I don't argue vehemently that abiogenasis happened.
doesn't being an 'atheist by nature' argue against creation for whatever other nonsensical non-provable methodology that set all else in motion?
Belief has nothing to do with presence of miracles or not, it is simply a part of faith, if your religion makes sense in a large part, then there is no point in doubt the whole, especially when you can't come up with better that is actually based in sound science, and experimentally demonstrable!

all the best
Reply

Alpha Dude
09-02-2010, 05:29 PM
Here is my hypothesis as it stands:

Atheist traits:
i. feign intellectualness
ii troll-like
iii. insecure
iv. cynical

These are based on empirical and observable deductions. For a clear example, please observe the posts of Subject a (Philosopher) in this thread.

Now, I know that, in order for this theory of mine to be accepted, it must be independently verified by peers. I wouldn't ask anyone to have blind faith in my work. Perish the thought. :heated:

The Vales Lily, would you kindly peer review my hypothesis so that we can reach a definitive consensus? :p
Reply

جوري
09-02-2010, 05:34 PM
Originally Posted by Bedouin

The Vales Lily, would you kindly peer review my hypothesis so that we can reach a definitive consensus? :p
I am currently working on two papers insha'Allah one for orthopedic scoliosis cases, and the other still to undergo IRB approval concerning a terrible side effect that happens during prolonged back surgery (don't want to disclose details because people steal your ideas and reclaim them)we should convene in a couple of weeks and workout the details of your paper but for now we should be mum about the details lest it be stolen, it is a doggy dog world but I really think we can go somewhere with it..


:w:

Reply

atheistbynature
09-02-2010, 05:54 PM
Originally Posted by Bedouin
Here is my hypothesis as it stands:

Atheist traits:
i. feign intellectualness
ii troll-like
iii. insecure
iv. cynical

These are based on empirical and observable deductions. For a clear example, please observe the posts of Subject a (Philosopher) in this thread.

Now, I know that, in order for this theory of mine to be accepted, it must be independently verified by peers. I wouldn't ask anyone to have blind faith in my work. Perish the thought. :heated:

The Vales Lily, would you kindly peer review my hypothesis so that we can reach a definitive consensus? :p
lol. But seriously just a generalization.
Reply

Al-Yasa
09-02-2010, 10:54 PM
wow didnt know that about sharks

learn something new everyday
Reply

Predator
09-03-2010, 03:59 PM
The birth of Prophet Yahya (AS) was also miracle birth , He was born to a woman who was barren

He said: "O my Lord! How shall I have son, seeing I am very old, and my wife is barren?" "Thus," was the answer, "Doth Allah accomplish what He willeth." [Qur'an 3:38-40]

And bigger creation is the creation of Adam (AS) without father and mother
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-24-2008, 08:29 AM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 06-11-2007, 10:45 PM
  3. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-08-2006, 04:48 PM
  4. Replies: 95
    Last Post: 06-16-2006, 11:01 PM
  5. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 03-28-2006, 05:38 PM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!