Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by Unconcept, Mar 3, 2012.
Yes, that's me Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Haha, that's funny. You don't have an evil twin brother after all.
That straight line business is cool, but it doesn't invalidate the other inaccuracies in the Quran. The Egyptians built the pyramids and we don't know how. The Maya built pyramids, too. They also predicted the exact date of the Galactic Alignment-something astrologers in 1998 were unable to predict the exact date to.
I think it probably is just more evidence for the Ancient Astronaut theory.
The passages about 'Haman' appear in the stories about Moses and his confrontations with the Pharaoh which also appears in other religious texts that predates the Qu'ran.
So it is highly probable that it was borrowed from other religious text..
I have to say, your own writing does not match at all with the majority of your post.
As many have pointed out already, it is more than probable that he borrowed the name of Haman when re-telling the story of Moses.
There is also the distinct possibility that as with all 'mythical stories', the name and the story itself was passed down verbally through the generations, and the meanings of some names and words could have remained constant in certain regions he would have visited.
You would need to look at the book of Esther and see how the word/name 'Haman' was used.
The story is that he built a 75ft gallows...
So he is associated with building something. There is also the fact that in the story of Esther, he had planned to eradicate all Jews, including Esther. In the story of Moses in the Qu'ran, he was responsible for killing the son's of the Israelites..
Ermm even the ancient Egyptians knew and understood evaporation. Also how much rain fell could also be a matter of observation and agricultural practices around at the time would have known and understood the weather pattern quite well. If you want to know about how well ancient societies understood evaporation and condensation, just look at how salt was produced in ancient times and what condesation was used for (ie cooling in ancient Egypt with the use of fans for examle).
I'd go into further detail but I am quite tired and it's late here..
But facts can be found in all kinds of things. That doesn't make them prophetic or special or deific. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! :blbl:
Oral transmission is the most likely. The theology of the Norse survived with oral transmission for the better part of a thousand years. There are numerous cases in North American theology also.
Early workers of many societies were abole ot make mathematical estimations with little information. It wouldn't surprise me if this were a retroactive estimation either.
Could someone explain the OP to me.
God is here, and He has proof.
I tried reading it, but it was like Hieroglyphics.
The name Haman is mentioned quite a bit in that. Proof positive.
Thanks to Ninja for joining sciforums just for this one post.
1- From embryology in quran by Hamza Andreas:
FROM A LUMP TO BONES?
A common misconception, usually made by non-Arabists, is that this verse can be literally translated as “and We made that lump into bones”. From this, they conclude that this verse is unscientific because a lump of flesh cannot turn into a mass of bones. However, this is based upon a crude understanding of Arabic grammar and the Qur’an's eloquence. This verse, from a grammatical perspective,
has the meanings of: “and We made of/from/out of the lump bones”.
This is why Yusuf Ali translates this verse as “then we made out of that lump
bones”74; Shakir translates it as “then We made (in) the lump of flesh bones”; and A J Arberry, in his translation of the Qur’an which is still used by academics today, translates this verse as “then We created of the tissue bones”.75
NOT REAL BONES?
Another proposition from commentators is that at this stage there are no real
bones. It is argued that the apparent bones are mere cartilage as ossification is
incomplete and, as such, the Qur’an must therefore be inaccurate. They further
assert that the Arabic term for cartilage should have been used instead of ‘idhaam.
Although a valid contention, it is misplaced. The Arabic word for cartilage refers to a type of cartilage that is not a precursor to bones, but rather remains as flexible connective tissue. Also, the `idhaam encompasses the cartilaginous form of the bones as the skeletal framework is put in place. Additionally, the process of ossification begins by the 8th week,76 continuing on after birth, with the eventual completion of the ossification process at around puberty. Barry Mitchell and Ram
The centres of ossification first appear in the limb bones during the eighth week. By the twelfth week, the shafts of the limb bones are ossified, though the carpal bones of the wrist remain cartilaginous until after birth. The ossification of the three largest tarsal bones of the ankle begins about 16 weeks, but some of the smaller tarsal bones do not ossify until 3
years after birth.77
From this perspective, it would be a medical absurdity to assume newborns or
young teenagers do not have bones simply because they require ossification,
especially since ossification completes at the end of the growth-spurt of puberty.
Nevertheless if this were the case, and we are to take this stage as being ‘boneless’,
as it were, the derisions of the word `idhaam would allow for an all encompassing interpretation because the “cartilaginous models of the various bones”78 is included
in its meaning.
1. the BASE rule is that an established scientific fact can never contradict an authentic hadeeth or the Qur'an AND vice versa.
2. The realm of contradiction lies in one of the sources as NOT being established, either the scientific theory that is promoted as fact (when in reality it is a theory under a theoretical [phase) or the hadeeth is weak or is not to be understood in the tangent it was mistakenly understood.
3. conclusively- if there seems to be a contradiction, then most likely the scientific theory that is viewed as a fact in reality is not a fact, or the hadeeth has a flaw in it in terms of its chain back to the prophet, or its understanding was not reached accurately by those who accepted the hadeeth and it is estbalished as correctly attributed to the prophet (alaihi salatu salaam).
4- The Prophet (pbuh)doesn't speak from his own inclination. وَمَا يَنطِقُ عَنِ الْهَوَىٰ
Hadeeths touched the topic under discussion:
1- وَإِذَا سَبَقَ مَاءُ الرَّجُلِ مَاءَ الْمَرْأَةِ نَزَعَ الْوَلَدَ، وَإِذَا سَبَقَ مَاءُ الْمَرْأَةِ نَزَعَتْ
2- وَأَمَّا الشَّبَهُ فِي الْوَلَدِ فَإِنَّ الرَّجُلَ إِذَا غَشِيَ الْمَرْأَةَ فَسَبَقَهَا مَاؤُهُ كَانَ الشَّبَهُ لَهُ، وَإِذَا سَبَقَ مَاؤُهَا كَانَ الشَّبَهُ لَهَا "
3- وَهَلْ يَكُونُ الشَّبَهُ إِلاَّ مِنْ قِبَلِ ذَلِكِ إِذَا عَلاَ مَاؤُهَا مَاءَ الرَّجُلِ أَشْبَهَ الْوَلَدُ أَخْوَالَهُ وَإِذَا عَلاَ مَاءُ الرَّجُلِ مَاءَهَا أَشْبَهَ أَعْمَامَهُ
In the first 2 hadeeths the word is "Sabaqa" سبق which means
1- precede -outrun.
2- win - defeat - overpower.
In the third hadeeth the word is "alaa" علا which means:
overpower/take over/be superior.
the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said: Let her ask, for i resemblance happens because of it. when her water/discharge is dominant, the born child resembles his maternal uncles but if water/discharge of the man was dominant, the born child should resemble his paternal uncles."
The content of this narration is reported in other narrations as well and despite the slight difference of words, all narrations include the highlighted words.
They key words of this hadeeth are:
a- water [i.e. liquid] of women
b-water of men(semen)
The topic of this hadeeth is about resemblance.
This narration goes along with the genetic science that resemblance of children is explained through the theory of dominance where only superior genes appear on the child. [This can be one of the interpretations and understanding...]
Water/discharge of women !
One major point that may cause all this confusion about this hadeeth and hence some people find it problemtic is because they tend to immeditaly understand the word "water of women" to mean ejaculated fluid that happens due to intimicay or arousing.
If we pay attention to the words used in this hadeeth we will find outstanding findings i.e. He صلى الله عليه وسلم used the word "water" in reference to the liquid of women and he did not specify it any further.
Well, there is no one better to explain one narration except the one who said it.
For this reason, let's know first what the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم meant with "water of women" since he did not specify it. Well, true that he did not specify it but he actually described it when he said in another narration " the water" of women is yellow and thin. So, what is that fluid that has such description?Simple, it is known that ejaculated discharges due to arousing or intimiacy are white.
The only liquid that is yellow is actually called "Follicuar Fluid" that is discharged at ovulation without being related to copulation or being aroused and it is directly related to preganacy. It comes out with a thin layer called follicle of which inside there is a small egg that supposed to combine with the men sperm during fertilization in order for a child to be created.
Finally, I would like you to understand that these narrations came in response to questions about why? and not to answer a question of how? In other words neither the questioner nor answerer [i.e. the Prophet] intended to explain the howness of this process. Rather, he wanted to explain why children sometimes resemble their fathers and some other times resemble their mothers.
This is proven and well explained in the other hadeeth when the Prophet clearly state that resemblence is a pure genetic when a woman delivered a black boy and the man doubted that his wife may have slept with another man as none of the family was black. When he explained it to the man he told him that a genetics of great grandfather may effect grand children. From this you know that it is obvious that the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) acknowledged that determining the howness was left for us to discover but the hadeeth only provided us with the key, which is the answer to why this happen.
Allah knows the best !
Another issue is a hadeeth related to Gender determination.
The Main Principles:
a- Quran and Sunnah must be understood according to Arabic langauge after gathering all narrations together as one narration may explain another.
b- In case a hadeeth or an Ayah is proven authentic then we find it contradicting a fact or a sensible event that is agreed on, we reconsider our understanding of the text because an authentic text cannot contradict a fact or agreed on truth.
a. The egg is always the carrier of the X chromosome (X).
b. The spermcell of a man is the carrier of X and Y chromosomes. [i.e. It carries man and women chromosome].
c. a. Determining the gender of children depends solely on the chromosome of the spermcell of the man.
d. The combination of the "X" chromosome of the woman with the chromosome "Y" of the man creates a boy(xy). However, if the "X" chromosome of the woman combine with the chromosome "X" of the man creates a girl (xx).
e. "Y" is manly while X is womanly.
" ماء الرجل أبيض وماء المرأة أصفر . فإذا اجتمعا، فعلا مني الرجل مني المرأة ، أذكرا بإذن الله . وإذا علا مني المرأة مني الرجل ، آنثا بإذن الله
قَالَ الْيَهُودِيُّ لَقَدْ صَدَقْتَ وَإِنَّكَ لَنَبِيٌّ ثُمَّ انْصَرَفَ فَذَهَبَ . فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم " لَقَدْ سَأَلَنِي هَذَا عَنِ الَّذِي سَأَلَنِي عَنْهُ وَمَا لِي عِلْمٌ بِشَىْءٍ مِنْهُ حَتَّى أَتَانِيَ اللَّهُ بِهِ "
The True Translation:
The water of the man is white and the water of the woman is yellow. When they get together, if the semen of the man become above the semen of the woman, the child is male, by the permession of Allah, and if the semen of the woman becomes above the semen of the woman, the child is a female by the permession of Allah.
The Jew said: What you have said is true; verily you are an Apostle. He then returned and went away. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: He asked me about such and such things of which I have had no knowledge till Allah gave me that.
Study of the Hadeeth:
a. As we know that women has no role in deciding the gender of the child when fertilization takes place and the text appears to state something that seem to contradict this fact, we need to resort to laid down principles in order to guideline our understanding. This principle state that in such case, we reconsider our understanding to the texts. How? I will explain it in the following point.
b. It is important to pay attention to the used words in the hadeeth. The key words we would like to highlight (I will translate the words of the text litterally to explain it further).
a- The word above here means "dominant" as this is one of the known meaning of the word "above" and has been used in Quran to mean "dominant and controlled".
b. The first half of the hadeeth referred to the man and woman liquids as "water" while in the second half he became more specific as referred to it as "semen".
c. We already know that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم mentioned in other hadeeths that the "water" of women is involved in process of fertilization. Then we realized that this water has a description that does not befit ejaculated fuilds since ejaculated fluids are white in color whereas he described the color as yellow and thin.
d. The sound understanding of this text is that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was referring in this hadeeth to the male and female chromosome of the spermcell of the man (X as the female chromosome and Y as the male chromosome). Based on this, the Prophet meant that when the male factor is dominant then it is a boy but when the female factor is domionant then it is a girl. This is what science states and this is the sound understanding that one should have beacuse the text can be understood in various ways and we know that authentic texts must be in agreement with agreed on facts.
e- He didn't know about that except what Allah told him.
what may be the cause of misunderstanding is that it is because when people "understood" it, they assumed that the word "semen " used in this hadeeth refer to man and woman' water mentioned earlier while as a matter of fact, he صلى الله عليه وسلم was referring to the semen of the man only which is always a carrier of male and female chromosomes. This is supported by the fact that the word "semen" is always exclusively for men while women liquid is always called water only.
In short, it seems according to the words and structure of what was stated, that the issue of "dominance" is purely in targeting the dominance of x chromosome (female) and y chromosomes (male), particularly because women are scientifically not classified as having "sperm"
And Allah knows the best !
Congratulations. You have put more nonsense in one post than most people could achieve in thousands.
What complete and utter shite!
Then you obviously know little about Neolithic temples and burial tombs and stone circles and the manner in which they often aligned with the sun and other neolithic objects. Alignments were big in our ancient history. You can look at the UK as a prime example.
Oh come on! It was comedy gold!
How can you get better than this?
And here is the reality:
Glands in the cervix produce a clear mucus. These secretions may turn white or yellow when exposed to the air. These are normal variations.
Both of them have been copying broadly from other sites without so much as a reference or link. They obviously have never been to a single science class or read any books..
Just count yourself lucky not to live in a country where people believe in this drivel.
It's not comedy gold when they find reasons to cut your clitoris off.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
This is irrelevant and inflammatory. Regardless of its merit, you are obliged to argue the case at-hand. Or step out and report it to have it locked.
Troll behavior does not look good on you Kremmen.
People will believe in drivel regardless of where they live. Be it this drivel or other types of drivel.
That is based on the culture and not religion. In the 19th century, doctors in the UK and the US actually practiced it because they believed it 'cured insanity, masturbation and nymphomania'.. It is more a case of 'my mother did it to me and I must carry on the tradition'.. It is why many non-religious parents circumcise their son's penis, so that the son's penis looks like Daddy's who had been circumcised for the exact same reason when he was a baby..
What I do think is comedy gold about his post is that something that would have been easily observed is deemed a miracle because it was known at that time. I doubt the vaginal discharge of women would have changed from the time of Mohammed to now, since it is known to turn yellow when coming into contact with the air for many women.
Even so all the verses in it that mentions facts are bonafide facts I just haven't proven that and I definitely can't prove all the facts.
If you are trying to prove your own ignorance, you have succeeded! Not sure why such a feat would mean that the supernatural claims in the Quran are also true.
I am usually very tolerant.
What does get me hopping mad is when people who have a scientific background use their knowledge and education to spread misinformation.
It's not an anti Muslim thing.
Creation science gets me equally annoyed.
I find genital mutilation inflammatory.
That post was factulent.
Kremmen and SG:
Stop that, you two. You have been obliged. Respect tha authoritah.
Separate names with a comma.