Attention Atheist

dickdasterdly666 said:

No actually, we were destroyed after the golden age and only started picking back up not long ago.{or were trying at least}
We are told that as science progresses the more discoveries made the more the Quran is revealing what its saying. and it also tells us that the enemies will be given great wealth and they will keep spending it till its all broken down and gone.
also many prophecies were made and alot have been uncovered and alot are yet to come alight, one is that Rome and Spain will be Muslim again one day.
And then there is the Challenge posed. which has never been taken out because of how unbelievably delicate and balanced it is and everything is mathematically arranged and specific words and numbers are arranged in proportion which makes it impossible to duplicate, one word would upset the whole balance.
talks about Physics, Geography, botany, Geology, Oceanology, Biology, Astronomy, Zoology, Medicine, Physiology, Embryology{which is one of the most detailed} and General Science among the normal Texts and what they have revealed in the world till now.
http://thisistruth.org/truth.php?f=ModernScience#Ghttp://thisistruth.org/truth.php?f=ModernScience#Medicine

Click to expand...

Mr.KushMan said:

I don't see the need to add islam. Maybe you can enlighten me to its superior importance over the topics discussed. Maybe you didn't get the memo, but "The Greatest Story Ever Told" section is about religion in general, notice how they thoroughly depict the doctrine from many other cultures including the sun god Horus, who has a near identical story and set of stories behind him to that of Jesus.

I don't know why you so persistently refuse to give up the God delusion. I read an article calling "god" merely a neurological secretion. I have found the idea of God to keep me thinking Good and Bad, where as I realize things are much more complex. This Good and Bad being a function of the reptilian brain, where as the neocortex keeps trying to rectify and recalculate the perceptive disturbances. Religion keep people shallow and hidden from their true potential.

Peace

EDIT: @ OutDaCloset - Sorry!

Click to expand...

dickdasterdly666 said:

Oh sorry about that my last link was broke in my last post.
here before you run along with your ZG hero:
http://conspiracyscience.com/articles/zeitgeist/part-one/
This will clear up all the misconceptions running around in your mind about the subject.
I will give you that as I am not properly versed in biblical studies to make any statements about those similarities, or lack there of, but will keep them in mind when considering the tales.


and I think it is interesting that Islam is not mentioned in a film of that caliber since its being targeted from every other angle, why not do the same with this, i mean it would only be for the better right? unless that exposes the films credibility?
=====================================================================================================
"ZG, Addendum, is also 2 hours long. Yet, "Islam" is only mentioned 3 times in ZG Addendum but in a general way at the same time as addressing Judaism & Christianity. Again, there was no mention of sharia law, sharia banking or finance or investment or the Islamic monetary system whatsoever."
Maybe its because '"Islam"' is so god damned far left field that there is only time to be wasted commenting on it.

"The Zeitgeist Movement whether inadvertent or not up-holds Islam as superior by default in the eyes of Muslims since Islam is not addressed. And Muslims are using Zeitgeist to their advantage. We need some balance here. If ZG is attempting to be a worldwide movement then that movement must also address Islamic issues too. By addressing Christianity but not Islam it's only addressing half the problem. It's like addressing the right hand but omitting what the left hand is doing."

This is a matter of subjectivity. By postulating what the film maker was trying to say, by not specifically mentioning Islam, you tear the intended meaning out of the words. Ultimately this little bit is of little concern.

"I look forward to the day that TZGM members and moderators have the integrity to criticize Islam equal to the level they criticized Christianity in Zeitgeist part 1."What? Are we bartering blood diamonds or something? All religions are fallible, just some are a little more target worthy. I am sure some people who grew up Islamic are just as critical of Islam, but people generally like to talk about what they know.
"The Zeitgeist Movement has no problem bashing religion EXCEPT when it comes to addressing Islam. Suddenly, TZGM members find it a useful, convenient tactic to get offended out of proportion & make demands for immediate censorship."

And if you didnt notice, the link you saw before which the above quotes are from was an ANTI-ISLAMIC site.So im not even making this up from my side and im not giving you Islamic sites to look at.

======================================================================================================

"Religion keep people shallow and hidden from their true potential."
Im not sure which religion your talking about but i think you need to have a look at history from all angles before you make a statement like that.

Click to expand...

mindphuk said:

What things does the Quran say about embryology that was not known or could be figured out back when it was written?


Even the most ancient people were hardly stupid, they came up with many things correct about nature. One thing about embryology that I doubt is present is the fact that every species goes through stages of its ancestor predecessors. Because if it says that, then why doesn't Islam accept common ancestry of Darwinism?

Just a question, why are you here on a marijuana website? Isn't it forbidden to take intoxicants?

Click to expand...

OutDaCloset said:

everybody just shut up!

Click to expand...

usda101 said:

Calm down, damn ,the answer is we have no idea.... period, an neither do you .But to beleive it was created in seven days is the ignorance you refere to.An im no aetheist.

Click to expand...

Mr.KushMan said:

I speak of all religion, it pries people away from critical thinking by convincing them that everything is completely watched over, and is the way it is because. Making them submissive to authority, creating prime candidates to die in war for falsified beliefs. Every form of belief that requires sets and standards, procedures or rituals, removes the person from the true nature of their own existence. Ultimately coming back to a philosophical-mixture of quantum physics and solipsism, where by self philosophizing is the most important staple in the life of any mind.

Peace

Click to expand...

usda101 said:

Calm down, damn ,the answer is we have no idea.... period, an neither do you .But to beleive it was created in seven days is the ignorance you refere to.An im no aetheist.

Click to expand...

dickdasterdly666 said:

Who said anything was created in 7 days?

Click to expand...

dickdasterdly666 said:

"What things does the Quran say about embryology that was not known or could be figured out back when it was written?"

Professor Keith L. Moore.
Keith L. Moore is a professor emeritus in the division of anatomy (department of surgery), former Chair of anatomy from 1974 to 1984[1] and associate dean for Basic Medical Sciences (Faculty of Medicine) at the University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada. He has also worked at the King Abdulaziz University in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Moreover, he is a founding member of the American Association of Clinical Anatomists (AACA). He was President of the AACA between 1989 and 1991[2]. He is most known for his textbooks on the subjects of anatomy and human embryology.
He has co-written (with professor Arthur F. Dalley II) Clinically Oriented Anatomy, which is the most popular English-language anatomy textbook in the world, used by scientists, doctors, physiotherapists and students worldwide. The book is especially popular because of its 'blue boxes' - passages of text on blue background that relate the classical anatomy to real-world concepts in the diagnosis and treatment of human patients. The book has been translated into multiple languages. He also co-wrote (with professor Anne M. R. Agur) Essential Clinical Anatomy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_L._Moore {early 1980s}

here is his testimony:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sg5aVgwN_2E

and here is a glimpse of the process:

"Man we did create from a quintessence (of clay); Then we placed as (a drop of) sperm (nutfah) in a place firmly fixed; Then we made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood (alaqah); Then of that clot we made a (fetus) lump (mudghah); then we made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh; then we developed out of it another creature." {23:12-14}

And it goes on and on to explain all the verses in detail with the professor.http://thisistruth.org/truth.php?f=CreationOfMan

==============
"then why doesn't Islam accept common ancestry of Darwinism?"

In reality Islam doesn't clash much with Darwin's evolution sayings so im not sure why you think we do? What we oppose is the notion that things came about by mistake-by nothing, as far as we are concerned we do support a type of evolution.{unless the text is read and accepted literally.}

Many Muslim scholars, from the golden age of Islam to today, adopted an evolutionary world view, and it is even supported in ways in the Quran.
----------------------------------------------------------
"Islam Darwin Problem"
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2009/10/25/in_the_muslim_world_creationism_is_on_the_rise/?page=full
----------------------------------------------------------
I wont answer your last question, no offense. lets stay on the subject.

Click to expand...

mindphuk said:

Dr. Moore may be quite impressed but not me.

If this is the case, not only is the Qur'an wrong, but it also plagiarises ancient Greek literature!

Click to expand...

Leothwyn said:

The bible and quran do. In modern times, as old tales continue to become irrelevant and are proven wrong, people generally start to loosen up their interpretations. So, the 6 or 7 day creation myth conveniently gets a new interpretation. A 'day' now really means thousands or millions of years. Strange that in all of the old tales, nobody thought to mention that equation. That's the thing about these old myths and tales... they're so vague, that re-interpreting them is pretty easy - as we've seen with your proclamations about ancient islam's great understanding of geology, biology, etc.. That's how mountains being called 'firm' can be interpreted as a thorough understanding of plate tectonics.

Click to expand...

mindphuk said:

Dr. Moore may be quite impressed but not me.

http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Science/embryo.html
Sura 22:5 says "We created you out of dust, then out of sperm, then out of a leech-like clot, then from a morsel of flesh, partly formed and partly unformed ... and We cause whom We will to rest in the wombs for an appointed term, then do We bring you out as babes." Sura 23:13-14 repeats this idea by saying God "placed him as (a drop of) sperm (nutfah) in a place of rest, firmly fixed; then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood (alaqa); then out of that clot We made a (foetus) lump (mudghah), then We made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh; then We developed out of it another creature." 75:38 also says man becomes an alaqa and 96:2 says we came from alaq.
Moore however goes further and incredibly he claims in a later edition of his textbook that the Qur'an "states that the resulting organism settles in the womb like a seed, 6 days after its beginning" [9]. This really would be amazing if it was true. Actually the Qur'an says nothing of the sort.
We have to ask what the precise meaning of these words is in order to know whether the verses contain important scientific statements that have only recently been discovered, as Moore and others claim. In comparison with the meaning of nutfah, it is rather more difficult to understand what alaqa means. Many different suggestions have been made: clot (Pickthall, Maulana Muhammed Ali, Muhammed Zafrulla Khan, Hamidullah), small lump of blood (Kasimirski), leech-like clot (Yusuf Ali), and "leech, suspended thing or blood clot" (Moore, op. cit.). Moore suggests that the appearance of an embryo of 24 days' gestation resembles a leech, though this is rather debatable. In side view the developing umbilicus (genetically part of the embryo) is almost as big as the "leech-shaped" part into which a human is formed and the developing placenta (which also consists of tissue that is genetically from the embryo) is much larger than the embryo. It is claimed that the ancient sages would not have been able to see an embryo about 3mm long and describe it as leech-like, but Aristotle correctly described the function of the umbilical cord, by which the embryo "clings" to the uterus wall in the fourth century B.C. [10]. It is impossible to believe the suggestion of Bachir Torki [11] that alaq in 96:2 means links, referring to the gene code of DNA, as this makes a nonsense out of other verses where the word is used, such as 22:5 ("we made you from a drop of sperm, then from that a gene code, then from that a little lump of flesh....").

A 24/25 day embryo at the alaqa stage, approx. 2 mm long
To establish a definition for alaqa we might take a look at the Qamus al-Muheet, one of the most important Arabic dictionaries ever compiled, by Muhammed Ibn-Yaqub al-Firuzabadi (AD 1329-1415) [12]. He says that alaqa has the same meaning as a clot of blood. In 96:2 the word alaq is used, which is both a collective plural and a verbal noun. The latter form conveys the sense of man being created from clinging material or possibly clay, which is consistent with the creation of Adam in the Bible from the dust of the ground (Genesis 2:7) and some of the other Qur'anic verses listed above. However, the translators of the Qur'an have all translated alaq as "clot" as opposed to "clinging" in 96:2 because the use of the singular alaqa elsewhere forces them to use "clot" here too, despite the attraction for the meaning "clinging" or leech-like which is perhaps more scientifically accurate.
Another source of information are the early Muslim commentators. Ibn Kathir wrote that when the drop of water (nutfah) settled in the womb it stayed there for forty days and then became a red clot (alaqa), staying there for another forty days before turning to mudghah, a piece of flesh without shape or form. Finally it began to take on a shape and form. Both ar-Razi and as-Suyuti [13] claimed that the dust referred both to Adam's creation and to the man's discharge; nutfah referred to the water from the male and alaqa was a solidified piece of blood clot. Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (died about AD 1350) wrote that "the foetus is a living or dead babe animal which is sometimes found in the womb of a slaughtered animal, and its blood is congested" [14]. Another great physician, Ibn al-Quff wrote some 13 out of 60 chapters from "On Health Preservation" about embryology and pregnancy. He included a further stage of development one week after conception, the foam stage or raghwah. Up to 16 days the embryo was alaqa (clot) and after 27 to 30 days the clot turns into a lump of meat, mudghah [15]. These dates must be regarded as very approximate but are nevertheless a major improvement on what one of the most reliable Hadiths says about foetal development, as we shall see later.

A 26/27 day embryo, said to resemble a mouthful of flesh, but only 3 mm long
Moving onto the next stage of development, Razi described the mudghah as being a little piece of meat the size of what a man can chew. The idea that mudghah means chewed flesh is a later, and less accurate translation of the word, but the idea has persisted because it is claimed that the somites from which the backbone and other trunk structures develop bear a passing resemblance to teeth marks implanted in plastercine. It must be said that not only is this an imaginative interpretation however, but besides, Moore cannot claim that the mudghah should occur at 26-27 days since at that point the embryo is a mere 4mm long. One would have to wait around 8 weeks before the embryo was the size of chewed flesh (if a mouthful is defined as being 20-30mm wide), which is what mudghah really means. And in the following Hadith, transmitted by Bukhari and Muslim, Muhammed claims that the mudghah stage occurs between days 80 and 120. Yet by this time the foetus is considerably larger than a lump of flesh the size of which a man can chew, and looks very human-like and totally unlike meat.

`Abdullah (b. Mas'ud) reported that Allah's Messenger ... said: "Verily your creation is on this wise. The constituents of one of you are collected for forty days in his mother's womb in the form of blood [sperm?], after which it becomes a clot of blood in another period of forty days. Then it becomes a lump of flesh and forty days later Allah sends his angel to it ..."
Thus according to Muhammed, the drop of sperm remains in the womb for 40 days, then becomes a clot for a further 40 days, then a lump of flesh for 40 days [16]. It has been shown that human sperm can only survive inside a woman's reproductive tract for a maximum of 7 days; at 80 days the embryo has very definitely acquired the shape of a human being and looks nothing like either a clot or a mouthful of flesh.

An eleven week foetus, real size 7.5 cm, but according to Muhammed still at the alaqa stage, a clot of blood
The final stage of human development which the Qur'an describes is the creation of bones, and the clothing of bones with flesh. However, according to modern embryologists including Prof. Moore, the tissue from which bone originates, known as mesoderm, is the same tissue as that from which muscle ("flesh") develops [17]. Thus bone and muscles begin to develop simultaneously, rather than sequentially. Whereas however most of the muscle tissue that we have is laid down before birth, bones continue to develop and calcify (strengthen with calcium) right into one's teenage years. So far from bones being clothed with flesh, it would be more accurate if the Qur'an had said that muscles started to develop at the same time as bones, but completed their development earlier. The idea that bones are clothed with flesh is not only scientifically completely false, but is directly copied from the ancient Greek doctor Galen, as we shall see shortly.

Some possible explanations

Aristotle believed that humans originated from the action of male semen upon female menstrual blood [18] which leaves us with something of a dilemma. If we translate alaqa as "clot" it means that the Qur'an is completely wrong about human development, since there is absolutely no stage during which the embryo consists of a clot. The only situation in which an embryo might appear like a clot is during a miscarriage, in which case the clotted blood which is seen to emerge (much of which comes from the mother incidentally) is solidified and by definition no longer alive. So if ever an embryo appeared to look like a clot it would never develop any further into a human; it would be a dead mass of bloody miscarrying flesh. Since Muhammed had several wives it is entirely likely that he would be very familiar with miscarriages. Alternatively it could be hinting at Aristotle's incorrect belief that the embryo originated from the combination of male sperm and female menstrual blood.
Moore avoids this problem by translating alaqa as a leech, since he is well aware that there is no stage in development when the embryo is a clot. As we have seen however, this is only to justify his interpretation that an embryo of 24-25 days is a clinging leech-like alaqa and one at 26-27 days is a mudghah with teeth-marks. A further problem with this view is that if the alaqa is translated "leech" because it appears to be clinging to the uterus wall, does this mean that the foetus only clings to the uterus wall for a few days? Obviously it remains attached for the entire nine months of gestation.
There are other problems with Moore's interpretation too. Not least is the claim of Muhammed that the dates of the alaqa and mudghah were 40-80 days and 80-120 days of gestation respectively, rather than 24-25 days and 26-27 days. It also begs the question as to why, if the Qur'an really is giving us a highly precise scientific account of human development, it only mentions four stages, nutfah, alaqa, mudghah, plus the clothing of bones with flesh. Between fertilization and day 28 for example Moore lists no fewer than 13 stages in his textbook. Why does the Qur'an say nothing about any of these other stages? The reality is that the more ambiguous the meaning of the Arabic terms, and the more meanings that can be attached to certain words, the less convincingly can they be said to be highly precise scientific terms.
However, the most convincing explanation, and the most worrying for those who maintain that the Qur'an is God's eternal Word, untampered with and free from any human interference, is that the Qur'an is merely repeating the teaching of the enormously influential Greek physician Galen. If this is the case, not only is the Qur'an wrong, but it also plagiarises ancient Greek literature!

Click to expand...