[EMBRYOLOGY] Bones and flesh

[aamirsaab]

That's great. Now, can you provide a quote from some other book, preferably one not written by an islam-admirer?

Are you implying that Keith's admiration for Islam inflluenced his investigations and overall conclusion into embryology? That's a pretty big claim to make, seeing as he is a well respected scientist. Has it not occured to you that his admiration for Islam came from during and after he had reached a conclusion? Though, I shall look for another book that agrees with his statement if it is that neccessary.

and anyway, the embrionic development is not as black and white as "bones come first, then come the muscles". There are different types of bones and muscles that start forming at different times, there are different stages of bone and muscle formation.

Indeed there are bones that develop at later stages. But is it not well-known that the first things to be formed in an embryo are the spine and spinal cord (in addition to the heart and brain) - the muscles that surround those aspects are formed much later. If one thinks logically about it, it is neccessary to have some form of skeleton/framework first then the muscles/cement job come after and encompass the existing bones - where and when neccessary, extra framework and cement is added later on to create the full building (or in this case, the human body). That could be considered simplistic but I think you will agree on the concept.

( which leaves as with a question what is a bone, what is a muscle? when is it formed? A what stage does it become a bone...:hiding

That's a different question than the original one asked. However, I shall look into it and get an answer to this new one. Though I should note that I have only recently researched into embryology, so it may take some time. Unless of course, your question was rhetorical

Even muslims in this thread pointed out that certain bone and muscle tissues are formed simultanously, whereas in some cases bones come first.

I think Keith L Moore is going to know more about embryology than all of the participant's in this particular thread. I think Keith holds the greater credency in this argument than any of us .

 

[Whatsthepoint]

Are you implying that Keith's admiration for Islam inflluenced his investigations and overall conclusion into embryology? That's a pretty big claim to make, seeing as he is a well respected scientist. Has it not occured to you that his admiration for Islam came from during and after he had reached a conclusion? Though, I shall look for another book that agrees with his statement if it is that neccessary.

You do that.
I am not claiming anything of the above, as it seems you've quoted from a book that's been published ebfore Moore wrote articles on embriology in the Quran. I'm just saying you should provide more sources.

Indeed there are bones that develop at later stages. But is it not well-known that the first things to be formed in an embryo are the spine and spinal cord (in addition to the heart and brain) - the muscles that surround those aspects are formed much later. If one thinks logically about it, it is neccessary to have some form of skeleton/framework first then the muscles/cement job come after and encompass the existing bones - where and when neccessary, extra framework and cement is added later on to create the full building (or in this case, the human body). That could be considered simplistic but I think you will agree on the concept.

Well, the Quran says Allah made the bones and clothed them with muscles, which may or may not imply that the bones are formed before the muscles.
Seeing that the heart, which is a muscle, is formed before the spine, no further debate is necessary, is it?kay:
And I don't agree with what you said. Muscles and bones can start developing at the same time, even from the same tissue that later differentiates.

That's a different question than the original one asked. However, I shall look into it and get an answer to this new one. Though I should note that I have only recently researched into embryology, so it may take some time. Unless of course, your question was rhetorical

It was rhetorical, but now when I think about it, you can look into it.
the Quran may or may not suggest that Allah clothes the bones with muscles only after they are done, fully formed, which is of course wrong.
On the other hand, if muscles start forming around the tissues that are to become bones, before they officially become bones, the ayat is wrong.

I think Keith L Moore is going to know more about embryology than all of the participant's in this particular thread. I think Keith holds the greater credency in this argument than any of us .

Yes, I agree, but seeing he is an expert in the field, I think the text you've quoted is probably a bolded text in the beginning of a chapter or a very short summary of something, a think boy at the bottom of the page perhaps, the Developing Human is a textbook. What I'm saying is that the part you've quoted could be intentionally simplistic, it could refer to the late developement of muscles rather than their formation etc.
It would be best if you could provide another source.

Does the verse in arabic suggest that the "clothing" of the bones comes after they're formed or at the same time (thumma, wa and all that).

 

[Whatsthepoint]

One more Q, is the verse 23:14 considered a miracle among muslims?

 

[aamirsaab]

Well, the Quran says Allah made the bones and clothed them with muscles, which may or may not imply that the bones are formed before the muscles.
Seeing that the heart, which is a muscle, is formed before the spine, no further debate is necessary, is it?kay:
And I don't agree with what you said. Muscles and bones can start developing at the same time, even from the same tissue that later differentiates.

Lol I just realised something about the ayat. I'll discuss it below

Does the verse in arabic suggest that the "clothing" of the bones comes after they're formed or at the same time (thumma, wa and all that).

The ayat states this: Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood; then of that clot We made a (foetus) lump; then we made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh; then we developed out of it another creature. So blessed be God, the best to create! (23:14).

In the two translations of the Quran I have, the ayat is translated exactly the same - so there seems to be no discrepancy with translation. Now if I highlight the main point of this ayat that relates to this thread and argument: then of that clot We made a (foetus) lump; then we made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh
So the Quran is actually saying that after the bones were formed they were then clothed with flesh (which is backed up by all embryology research, regardless of their opinion or conclusions on the formation of bones and muscles!) - it doesn't state anything about muscles or bones coming before one another, it simply states that the bones were clothed with flesh. So with regards to this comment, in the first post:

I showed some people the verse and they said that in fact muscles develop before (or at the same) the bones.

So, once again the Quranic ayat mentions nothing about the bones or muscles forming before one another. In other words the ayat has nothing to do with the muscles forming before/after the bones!
Which means my initial post and argument was wrong since I bolded the wrong bit of the excerpt. It also means that the person who stated the comment in the previous quote (not the original poster, but someone he had asked) had missunderstood the ayat completely. Which is what I did too!

P.s; I shall take onboard what you told me, whatsthepoint. Thanks and peace!

 

[FatimaAsSideqah]

As Salaam Alaykum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu

This continuation of Sura 23:14 indicates that out of the chewed lump stage, bones and muscles form. This is in accordance with embryological development. First the bones form as cartilage models and then the muscles (flesh) develop around them from the somatic mesoderm.

 

[Whatsthepoint]

In the two translations of the Quran I have, the ayat is translated exactly the same - so there seems to be no discrepancy with translation. Now if I highlight the main point of this ayat that relates to this thread and argument: then of that clot We made a (foetus) lump; then we made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh
So the Quran is actually saying that after the bones were formed they were then clothed with flesh (which is backed up by all embryology research, regardless of their opinion or conclusions on the formation of bones and muscles!)

Now, what exactly is flesh? what exactly is the thing bones are clotheth with? It's mainly muscles (and internal organs, but those are not clotheth around bones). Flesh is basically everything that is not bones. Mainly because it can be eaten and because the Quran does not mention anything else when describing the formation of the human body.
So, the Quran suggests that fetuses, for a certain period of time are skeletons, that is until the bones are (fully) formed, at which point they or their bones are clothed with flesh.I think this is the correct interpreation, especially in light of what you wrote:
after the bones were formed they were then clothed with flesh
The first part suggests the bones are completed, fully formed before they are clothed with flesh. If not, what were you trying to say?
In any way, the verse does suggest that the bones, for some time, are "naked", fleshless or at least that they are formed before the flesh. That is not the case as bones (or pre-bone tissues, such as cartilage), when formed, already are surounded by a certain tissue (and any tissue is flesh!). And some of them are, at the time of their formation, surrounded by tissue that is alredy forming into muscles, the flesh we, humans, eat.
The bones are always surounded by something, and that something will eventually become flesh. That brings us back to a question as to when does bone tissue become bones, does cartilage count as bones (I don't think it should, and by the time cartilage becomes bones, the surounding tissue is even more like the flesh we consume...) and when does non-bone tissue becomes flesh...

 

[Whatsthepoint]

As Salaam Alaykum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu

This continuation of Sura 23:14 indicates that out of the chewed lump stage, bones and muscles form. This is in accordance with embryological development. First the bones form as cartilage models and then the muscles (flesh) develop around them from the somatic mesoderm.

Is cartilage bones? No, it isn't. And not all bones and their "models" start forming before muscles.

 

[Whatsthepoint]

1. Does the verse say that the bones are formed BEFORE they're clothed with flesh?

2. Do muslims consider this verse (and the rest of the embriology-related verses) to be miraculous?

 

[IbnAbdulHakim]

so who here knows arabic and is a scholar? no one well then i guess we cant understand the ayyat [perfectly].

case closed, good night people

 

[aamirsaab]

I don't think I explained the verse very well. I'll repeat it: it's got nothing to do with which was formed first - bones or flesh. It's simply saying the bones were clothed in flesh aka muscles. That's the core bit of the ayat. The miracle of this, is that all embryologyical study backs it up (since they all seem to agree that the bones are clothed in flesh!) - at that time, it was not possible to investigate the claim in the ayat, yet after many many decades, it has been proven. Hence it is seen as a miracle in Islam.

P.s; I'm not a scholar or a student of embryology. Just a bacha with a lacha and internet access.

 

[Trumble]

I'll repeat it: it's got nothing to do with which was formed first - bones or flesh. It's simply saying the bones were clothed in flesh aka muscles. That's the core bit of the ayat. The miracle of this, is that all embryologyical study backs it up (since they all seem to agree that the bones are clothed in flesh!)

If that is the extent of the claim, where is the supposed 'miracle'? Every child and adult human being has 'bones clothed in flesh'.. what possible other conclusion was anyone likely to come up with regarding embryonic development?

 

[Whatsthepoint]

I don't think I explained the verse very well. I'll repeat it: it's got nothing to do with which was formed first - bones or flesh. It's simply saying the bones were clothed in flesh aka muscles. That's the core bit of the ayat. The miracle of this, is that all embryologyical study backs it up (since they all seem to agree that the bones are clothed in flesh!) - at that time, it was not possible to investigate the claim in the ayat, yet after many many decades, it has been proven. Hence it is seen as a miracle in Islam.

P.s; I'm not a scholar or a student of embryology. Just a bacha with a lacha and internet access.

Ok, now that I think about it, the verse does not necessarily imply that the bones are clothed after they've been formed.
Well, that's one lousy miracle, no offence, The Quran can do better.

 

[Cabdullahi]

Ok, now that I think about it, the verse does not necessarily imply that the bones are clothed after they've been formed.
Well, that's one lousy miracle, no offence, The Quran can do better.

Have you thought maybe its your lousy brain that cannot get around it:?

 

[Whatsthepoint]

Have you thought maybe its your lousy brain that cannot get around it:?

No, I haven't.

 

[crayon]

The miracle is not in the bones before the flesh, it is in the shape of the embryo at its different stages. This link explains it. http://www.answering-christianity.com/embryonic_development.htm

edit- here's another one http://www.islam101.com/science/embryo.html

 

[Whatsthepoint]

The miracle is not in the bones before the flesh, it is in the shape of the embryo at its different stages. This link explains it. http://www.answering-christianity.com/embryonic_development.htm

edit- here's another one http://www.islam101.com/science/embryo.html

Lol, sorry, I've seen a couple of versions of this miracles but never have I seen such a thorough one. It's no better then the rest, but the gum really had me.
IMHO it is just another example of abusing science to get a confirmation of what's written in the Quran, no offence.
Muslim ingenuity in the field of Quranic miracles never fails to surprise me!

 

[crayon]

You can actually tell the difference between the words more in arabic, so it is clearer. But meh, suit yourself.

But what do you mean by "abusing science"? How was it abused?

"Muslim ingenuity in the field of Quranic miracles never fails to surprise me!"
Ever think of the possibility that they may actually be miracles?

 

[aamirsaab]

''...The shape of the skeleton determines the general appearance of the embryo in the bones stage during the 7th week; muscles do not develop at the same time but their development follows soon after. The muscles take their positions around the bones throughout the body and therefore Clothe the bones. Thus, the muscles take their well known forms and strcutures... The stage of clothing with muscle occurs during the 8th week..." (Keith L. Moore, Developing Human, 3 . edition, W. B. Saunders Company, 1982, p 364a)

And the ayat:

Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood; then of that clot We made a (foetus) lump; then we made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh; then we developed out of it another creature. So blessed be God, the best to create!

So the ayat is saying talking about the muscles wrapping over the bones. And the extract from Keith L Moore agrees with this.

The miracle is this:
* The Prophet could not have know that (i.e what was revealed in the ayat with regards to the bones being clothed by flesh). In fact, at the time, no scientist could have validated or made that claim. Thus, any possibility that the Quran contains the information borrowed from any human on the planet is debunked [in this case, atleast]. The only conclusion that one can make, is that the ayat is from God himself [note this is not directed at anyone in particular, just stating a point]
* It was only modern day science that proved this claim. So not only does this ayat contain the exact words of God, but scientists have validated His word.

My apologies for not making this clearer in the very first place - I had not properly digested the information before explaining it.

 

[Whatsthepoint]

You can actually tell the difference between the words more in arabic, so it is clearer. But meh, suit yourself.

But what do you mean by "abusing science"? How was it abused?

It was abused on many levels.
The leech is intentionally drawn in a way that resembles the embrio (even that way, it does not quite resemble it, but anyway the shape of a leech resembling the shape of an embrio has no significance whatsoever, as it is a completely different type of animal.
The suspension of the embryo. I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean. If it means that the mebryo "hangs" from something, it's wrong. If it means the embryo is suspended (as in located) in the uterus, there's nothing miraculous about it.
Blood clot. The presence of uncirculating blood in an embryo does not make the embryo any like a blood clot. And I don't know where did they get the idea that blood does not circulate until the third week. The embryo mighnt not have its own fully developed cardiovascualr system by that time, but that doesn't mean the same blood stays in it for three weeks.
The chewed substance... I don't think I need to comment on this one.

Ever think of the possibility that they may actually be miracles?

Why of course! I am an agnostic. What I am saying is that the probability of the verses in question being miraculous is very low indeed.
I may be utterly mistaken.

 

[Whatsthepoint]

And the ayat:

So the ayat is saying talking about the muscles wrapping over the bones. And the extract from Keith L Moore agrees with this.

The miracle is this:
* The Prophet could not have know that (i.e what was revealed in the ayat with regards to the bones being clothed by flesh). In fact, at the time, no scientist could have validated or made that claim. Thus, any possibility that the Quran contains the information borrowed from any human on the planet is debunked [in this case, atleast]. The only conclusion that one can make, is that the ayat is from God himself [note this is not directed at anyone in particular, just stating a point]
* It was only modern day science that proved this claim. So not only does this ayat contain the exact words of God, but scientists have validated His word.

My apologies for not making this clearer in the very first place - I had not properly digested the information before explaining it.

Remember our deal? You said you'll provide other sources proving your claims. Any progress?
Were we not having a debate about muscles and bones only one page ago?
And besides the muscles are not wrapped around the bones, they are grown, which is a whole different thing. It's not like bones are fleshless until the 8th week at which point they're suddenly clothed with muscles. Different connected tissues develop into different things (in some cases simultaniously, but that, as it seems, is not the issue).