[EMBRYOLOGY] Bones and flesh

[Silver]

He may be, his (and one other guy's) anatomy book is supposed to be the most popuar of all the anatomy books in the world.
I don't know whether he is an authority in the field of embryology. The video quotes his book saying the bones get their familiar shape in the seventh week whereupon the muslces take there position around the bone forms. This is a simple, general explanation, Moore mostly writes text books, which might be the cause for it. And the text omits membranous bones, it doesn't say the bones are not actual bones, as tehy do not have calcium yet...

Moore is an authority on both anatomy and embryology and the Drs recommend us to use his books as reference.

 

[جوري]

Moore is an authority on both anatomy and embryology and the Drs recommend us to use his books as reference.

yup... people often think that every scientific term has to sound like this dysdiadokinesia
..
well in fact we have these terms and use them daily,
Nutmeg liver
strawberry gallbladder
chocolate cyst
Orphan Annie eye nucleus
fried egg appearance
anchovy paste (Amebic abscess of the liver)

these are a few of the winded lists we use daily in medicine to describe organs and their pathologies, and anyone is free to google to verify for themselves.. bottom line is for something to be described as a leech that clings (grossly) or a blastocyst attaching to the endometrium is very similar and very sound way to use language to transcend... the board of pathologists convenes every so often to re-define the terms.. what they deem synciotrophoblast might end up being placental trophoblast tomorrow.. if simple language is used to describe, it will be accurate and transcendent...


I am sickened by this topic and this constant back and forth...

please before you decide to 'debunk' or have an all out expose acquaint yourselves in both science, Arabic, and religion and then step back, have a look at the entire picture...

cheers

 

[Whatsthepoint]

Moore is an authority on both anatomy and embryology and the Drs recommend us to use his books as reference.

As I said, he may be, it seems he is.
Being an authority doesn't make everything he says true though!
His work associated to the Quran is about simple morphology, you don't have to be an embriology expert to chew a gum in a special way and coclude it resembles an embryo. Or a leech. Muslims could do that without him, perhaps they did. It's just that they needed a big name. So they invited Moore to Saudi Arabia, most probably payed him big money and gave him some time to make the verse appear scientifically correct. It's possible he was genuinely impressed with it. He doesn't seem to aprticulary proud of his work though. In one interview he was aksed about his work on the islamic holy book and he replied that he was involved with the quran over ten years ago...

 

[جوري]

When is one an authority in their field? when their views appeal to a western majority?
You can't speak for his work unless you were controverting with the same scientific basis, in which case we all fervently await the day you defend your thesis.. nor can you assess him as a person psychologically.

I suggest you hold on to your views, as I am not sure on what ground you are contesting his short of simply to be disagreeable?

cheers

 

[Whatsthepoint]

When is one an authority in their field? when their views appeal to a western majority?
You can't speak for his work unless you were controverting with the same scientific basis, in which case we all fervently await the day you defend your thesis.. nor can you assess him as a person psychologically.

I suggest you hold on to your views, as I am not sure on what ground you are contesting his short of simply to be disagreeable?

cheers

I'm not an embryologist, I don't know whether Moore is an authority in his field, I'm saying he might be. It's true I'd expect an authority to produce other things than text books though. Perhaps he's an authority in the field of medical textbooks..
So I'm not quite sure how western majority fits in this conversation..
I'm speaking against the work he did about the quran. It only deals with a couple of (simple) issues and words which you reallydon't have to be a medical doctor to understand.
Of course I can asses him as a person, everyone assesses other people, especially on message boards like this one. I won't claim my assessments are accuarte though.

 

[جوري]

I'm not an embryologist, I don't know whether Moore is an authority in his field, I'm saying he might be. It's true I'd expect an authority to produce other things than text books though. Perhaps he's an authority in the field of medical textbooks..

I don't understand what you mean by produce other things than textbooks? having interest in Islamic texts seems like outside interest?

So I'm not quite sure how western majority fits in this conversation..
I'm speaking against the work he did about the quran. It only deals with a couple of (simple) issues and words which you reallydon't have to be a medical doctor to understand.

It is only as simple as you want to break it down to.. a person is only as smart as they are educated!

as for western majority, meaning what agrees with views of non-muslims, the same way Dawkins or watsons and the likes are exalted in opinion simply for stating very private views banking on their prior works, for instance that 'black people are, in general, less intelligent than whites' because of their genetics!

Of course I can asses him as a person, everyone assesses other people, especially on message boards like this one. I won't claim my assessments are accuarte though.

I'll agree with the very last statement..

cheers

 

[Whatsthepoint]

I don't understand what you mean by produce other things than textbooks? having interest in Islamic texts seems like outside interest?

Well, I was thinking more like original research on embryology or some groundbreaking method of removing this and that from the uterus..

It is only as simple as you want to break it down to.. a person is only as smart as they are educated!

It is simple. It's reading verses and ascribing them medical phenomena that hold certain similarities. It's only a couple of verses and a couple of medical terms and phenomena which you don't have to be a medical doctor to understand. It's not like the Quran contains a 45 pages long essay explaining what the chances of a random formation of a cell are..
And I strongly disagree with your second notion.

as for western majority, meaning what agrees with views of non-muslims, the same way Dawkins or watsons and the likes are exalted in opinion simply for stating very private views banking on their prior works, for instance that 'black people are, in general, less intelligent than whites' because of their genetics!

that was Watson and his claims were denounced by practically everyone, he was even stripped off his academic positions. The west, Western Europe in particular, is the worst place to make racist or phobic comments. There's much more racism in the arab world than there is in the west.

 

[Imam]

The meanings of the word may or may not be. Which was intended in this context is
All it demonstrates is that Arabic may have a word that is appropriate. Good writers pick the right word, and it could have been picked here to mean one thing just as easily as all of them.


..

bad reasoning !!!!

If the Quran intended only the meaning of blood it would have used the basic word for it (Damm)

and the Quran would have described such stage the same as Galen,and the verse would have been as

Then We made the drop into damm (means only blood), then We made the blood into ........... (Quran, 23:12-14)

again what is the Arabic word which would be more accurate than (alaqa) to describe
the appearance,
the position,
the function,
of the embryo in such stage?

oh I forgot that you don't know Arabic...

but even those professionals in Arabic can never do it.

And it can be observed easily during pregnancy (although perhaps in rather unpleasant circumstances) that the embryo is 'suspended' within the womb.
..

but it can't be observed how it obtains nourishment from the blood of the mother, similar to the leech,let alone the absurdity of your guessing work,Mohamed been able to watch with his naked eyes the sequence of the stages.....

The best you could realistically claim is that the embryo resembles a 'chewed-like substance'. I'll concede that, as I will the resemblance to a leech (maybe somebody chewed a leech?).

to easily refute that ,let's reverse the quranic words

Then We made the drop of semen into a mudghah (chewed substance) , then We made the alaqah into an alaqah (leech, suspended thing, and blood clot)

in other words ,the first stage the embryo looks like a chewed substance (but not yet suspended) and then it develope to a leech in function and appearance and that of a blood clot,This is due to the presence of relatively large amounts of blood present in the embryo,and all of a sudden suspend to the womb of the mother !!!!!!!

that is for sure absured and not Quranic neither scientific

the quranic description is in order

in other words in the first stage the embryo does not look like a “chewed substance.” for the sake of argument,even if the the embryo at the first stage looks like a “chewed substance.” the word mudghah “chewed substance.” would not be impressive , as it doesn't convey the meaning of a suspended thing neither the leech which sucks blood for nourishment.....

your reasoning fells short.....

But as I said, not knowing Arabic let alone in a Qur'anic context I have to concede that point...

you'd better concede the whole thread due to your lack of its study tools.

 

[جوري]

Well, I was thinking more like original research on embryology or some groundbreaking method of removing this and that from the uterus..

lol.. ok.. I am not sure how to comment on that!

It is simple. It's reading verses and ascribing them medical phenomena that hold certain similarities. It's only a couple of verses and a couple of medical terms and phenomena which you don't have to be a medical doctor to understand. It's not like the Quran contains a 45 pages long essay explaining what the chances of a random formation of a cell are..
And I strongly disagree with your second notion.

Again.. if you are looking for poetry, numerology, science, history in the Quran, then you'll have missed the point... it is meant as a guidance and an admonition to man kind not to prepare you for your board exams.. unlike previous scriptures be they of those that we Muslims consider divine revelations or just mere mythology, the Quran isn't wrought with error, so that in the heart of the believer there can be no doubt.. in the heart of an atheist or agnostic or whatever, I don't think it will mean anything, you can explain it away like most orientalists and live a perfectly happy life..

I still stand by my statement.. a person is as smart as they are educated, and education is an expansive thing, not just a telescopic window from some book, it is an on going process!

that was Watson and his claims were denounced by practically everyone, he was even stripped off his academic positions. The west, Western Europe in particular, is the worst place to make racist or phobic comments. There's much more racism in the arab world than there is in the west.

Again, it depends on whom the comments are made of to spark an outrage.. the west in general is very racist amongst the entire world and I have done a bit of traveling.. They have this amazing sense of entitlement, and a false authority to pass random unfounded comments as if of biblical importance -- which is to say very little on how much of the world they have dismantled and monopolized....


cheers

 

[Whatsthepoint]

lol.. ok.. I am not sure how to comment on that!

I hope lol's for the silly comment about the uterus? I'm not quite sure if embryologists ever go there, but I think you got the picture anyway.
So, give me a reason why Moore is considered an authority in embryology?

Again.. if you are looking for poetry, numerology, science, history in the Quran, then you'll have missed the point... it is meant as a guidance and an admonition to man kind not to prepare you for your board exams.. unlike previous scriptures be they of those that we Muslims consider divine revelations or just mere mythology, the Quran isn't wrought with error, so that in the heart of the believer there can be no doubt.. in the heart of an atheist or agnostic or whatever, I don't think it will mean anything, you can explain it away like most orientalists and live a perfectly happy life..

I don't think the quran is free from error, as I've already told you. My inability to read or write Arabic prevents me from explaining it away just like that, however I do have my theories and I don't think the book is a word of god or anything. And so far, no one has convinced me into thinking otherwise.

 

[- Qatada -]

I don't think the quran is free from error, as I've already told you. My inability to read or write Arabic prevents me from explaining it away just like that, however I do have my theories and I don't think the book is a word of god or anything. And so far, no one has convinced me into thinking otherwise.

so funny lol.. you claim you dno arabic, so you can't find 'flaws' in the Qur'an, yet the exact same Qur'an - whose language you don't know - has errors in it.


how ironic.

 

[Whatsthepoint]

so funny lol.. you claim you dno arabic, so you can't find 'flaws' in the Qur'an, yet the exact same Qur'an - whose language you don't know - has errors in it.


how ironic.

I didn't say that. My lack of understanding Arabic prevents me from seeing and understanding the so called literary miracles that muslims speak of. So without that I cannot dismiss the Quran to be a work of Muhammad just like that. Nit knowing Arabic doesn't prevent me from finding flaws though. There are over 17 English transaltions of the Quran, tafseers, hadiths and countless written claims, comments, translations etc of Arabic spaking muslims, including ones on boards like LI.

 

[- Qatada -]

1) You HAVE to know the arabic language to attempt to understand the Qur'an properly. Since the difference in languages and the meanings of words causes translations to be unaccurate, especially when it comes to the arabic language (due to its triple letter root system which many other languages don't have.)


2) It may be that if you understand the Arabic, then you realise how there aren't any flaws within it. But it can't just be basic arabic, you need to know Arabic in depth to find any 'flaws' within it. You cant use your own opinions or present day scientific theories, which can change over time and aren't always constant.


3) If someone interprets a verse to have a certain meaning - and that interpretation is wrong, it doesn't mean that the verse is false. What it may imply is that the person who interpreted the verse in that certain manner has interpreted it the wrong way. However, if there is something which matches with authentic science - then that interpretation of the verse may be true.


4) The challenge of the Qur'an is quite clear, if you really doubt it is from God - then bring forth something similar to it. No-one has been able to do so in history, if they did - they would boast about it. And no - it isn't because they fear the Muslim ruler, rather, its because they're afraid to get humiliated because they cannot bring anything similar to it [not even 3 verses!], even the Arabs who knew the truthfulness of Muhammad (peace be upon him) - who were at the peak of arabic eloquence were unable to, yet an illiterate man who had no experience in poetry surpassed them all throughout all of history?



If you really want to attempt to answer any of these points, address the last one (point no.4) - because you can't, and you know you can't. So you'll deny it or you may choose the guidance, and that is what the people before you did, and look where they are now - they are dead, in the earth, turned into dust, and they will be ressurected back like Allah gave you life when you were nothing.

Since you believe in a God, why isn't this God able to send a Messenger who is a human like we are? Why isn't this God able to create us and then send us guidance between truth and falsehood? If this God created us - why won't we return to Him? Why won't He judge us based on what we did? Why won't He reward the good-doers for their good, and punish the evil-doers for their evil?

 

[Abdul Fattah]

Selam aleykum
according to Ibn kathir, the meaning of the verse is:

(then We made the clot into a little lump of flesh,) which is like a piece of flesh with no shape or features.
[فَخَلَقْنَا الْمُضْغَةَ عِظَـماً]
(then We made out of that little lump of flesh bones,) meaning, `We gave it shape, with a head, two arms and two legs, with its bones, nerves and veins.'
[فَكَسَوْنَا الْعِظَـمَ لَحْماً]
(then We clothed the bones with flesh,) meaning, `We gave it something to cover it and strengthen it.'
source
B.t.w. tafsir ibn kathir was written before we had scientific knowledge of embriology​

So in conclusion, the verse is saying first flesh, then bones then some more flesh. So there is no contradiction with science.

 

[Whatsthepoint]

If you really want to attempt to answer any of these points, address the last one (point no.4) - because you can't, and you know you can't. So you'll deny it or you may choose the guidance, and that is what the people before you did, and look where they are now - they are dead, in the earth, turned into dust, and they will be ressurected back like Allah gave you life when you were nothing.

Since you believe in a God, why isn't this God able to send a Messenger who is a human like we are? Why isn't this God able to create us and then send us guidance between truth and falsehood? If this God created us - why won't we return to Him? Why won't He judge us based on what we did? Why won't He reward the good-doers for their good, and punish the evil-doers for their evil?

Indeed I can't. I'm not familiar with the original surahs in arabic, nor the attempts to make a surah like one of them. I'm not even sure what producing a surah like the ones in the Quran is suppossed to mean, what the criteria are if ther even are any, what can be different and what can't etc.
Why no one has succeeded so far? Well, could be many reasons, one of them being that quran is a true word of god of course. Others would be fear, as you already mentioned, it's possible that the criteria are so strict that it is simply impossible to do it, which does not necessarily imply a divine nature, or that there are no criteria and people rely solely on their subjective religious judgement which of course will favour their religious text etc etc.
and besides, Quran may not be the only inimitable piece of literature out there. Perhaps none is.
EDIT: Why it's completely possible that an iliterate man could have surpassed every Arab poet ever since. Unlikely, but possible, still a better explanation that a god, if you ask me.

No, I don't believe in a god, in fact I strongly doubt such being exists. But due to alck of evidence on either side I am an agnostic.
And if there were a god, I don't think he'd communicate with his people in a manner demonstrated by world's religions, through prophets, revelations etc. I'm even less confident about god posting his thoughts in a single language, like arabic for insatnce, and expect everyone to learn it in order to compehend his message and witness his true glory.
I'm not so sure about god punishing sinners, I'm quite certain though that a just god does not punish unbelievers though simply for their lack of "proper" belief.

 

[جوري]

I hope lol's for the silly comment about the uterus? I'm not quite sure if embryologists ever go there, but I think you got the picture anyway.
So, give me a reason why Moore is considered an authority in embryology?

for the same reason Robin is the Authority in pathology, wheater's for histology, Sabiston for surgery or grey for anatomy... There is a history to science, just like there is a history to the world with some characters standing out as stars given their knowledge, pioneering and contributions!

I don't think the quran is free from error, as I've already told you. My inability to read or write Arabic prevents me from explaining it away just like that, however I do have my theories and I don't think the book is a word of god or anything. And so far, no one has convinced me into thinking otherwise.

No one having the ability to convince you has more to do with you than anyone else's ability... I can tell you that this

is kidney tissue, and you can disagree loaning it, your own understanding and interpretation, to which of course, you are entitled, but you wouldn't be correct!
Every discipline is an expansive art form all its own.. You've to have deep knowledge to challange it-- Many have dedicated 20 years or so of their life to this, like Dr. Gary Miller..
Not speaking the language isn't an excuse or a rebuttal!

If you can find error in the Quran then I challenge you to find it!

cheers

 

[Whatsthepoint]

for the same reason Robin is the Authority in pathology, wheater's for histology, Sabiston for surgery or grey for anatomy... There is a history to science, just like there is a history to the world with some characters standing out as stars given their knowledge, pioneering and contributions!

ok..

Not speaking the language isn't an excuse or a rebuttal!
If you can find error in the Quran then I challenge you to find it!

cheers

I know it isn't. That's why I never claimed the quran was wrong for sure, or that there's mistakes for sure. I said I think there were and I still do. I never claimed there's flaws in any holy book actually.
well, the lastest I came across is Quran claiming there was a human man 60 feet tall walking the Earth, which is impossible on many levels. Of course, you can argue the laws of physics were different back then or something like that.

 

[جوري]

ok..

I know it isn't. That's why I never claimed the quran was wrong for sure, or that there's mistakes for sure. I said I think there were and I still do. I never claimed there's flaws in any holy book actually.
well, the lastest I came across is Quran claiming there was a human man 60 feet tall walking the Earth, which is impossible on many levels. Of course, you can argue the laws of physics were different back then or something like that.

Adam being 60 feet tall, isn't from the Quran.. it is a hadith..
There is a criteria against which the accuracy of hadiths are measured, and based on that people can choose to reject or accept it.. the Quran however is unaffected by that criteria given the nature of both.. The Quran (the word of God) hadiths, the words of the prophet SAS, and subjected to weak or strong narrative... I am sure the criteria is listed some where on this forum..

I am post call and I need a long snooze...

laters
cheers

 

[- Qatada -]

Indeed I can't. I'm not familiar with the original surahs in arabic, nor the attempts to make a surah like one of them. I'm not even sure what producing a surah like the ones in the Quran is suppossed to mean, what the criteria are if ther even are any, what can be different and what can't etc.

http://www.islamicboard.com/quran/53113-understanding-qur-s-literary-challenge.html

and besides, Quran may not be the only inimitable piece of literature out there. Perhaps none is.

Please do provide other pieces of literature which have had the same amount of influence world wide, which challenges others to bring something similar to it, while never being matched.

 

[Whatsthepoint]

Adam being 60 feet tall, isn't from the Quran.. it is a hadith..
There is a criteria against which the accuracy of hadiths are measured, and based on that people can choose to reject or accept it.. the Quran however is unaffected by that criteria given the nature of both.. The Quran (the word of God) hadiths, the words of the prophet SAS, and subjected to weak or strong narrative... I am sure the criteria is listed some where on this forum..

I am post call and I need a long snooze...

laters
cheers

Oops, my mistake. And I've only just realized the actual height was 90 feet.
The hadith was narated by Abu Huraira who I read is considered trustworthy.
If you remember we have quite a history of arguing about quranic flaws, mostly ones concerning astronomy.
Neither of us reached any progress in convincing the other if I remmber correctly. It's like that with every religion, as well as irreligion I guess. Religious people will not admit their religion is flawed, nor will the irreligious admit any religion is flawless or perfect. Every religion has its share of apologetics claiming there's not a single mistake in their holy text, refuting every allegation and dispute. Some people are convinced and some aren't.