₦airaland Forum

Quran is known to cover details about embryology and fetal development. It confirms the process starts with a drop of semen becoming a lump (zygote) multiple times.

He created you (all) from a single Person: then created, of like nature, his mate; and he sent down for you eight head of cattle in pairs: He makes you, in the wombs of your mothers, in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness. such is Allah, your Lord and Cherisher: to Him belongs (all) dominion. There is no god but He: then how are ye turned away (from your true Centre)?
Qur'an 39:6

O mankind! if ye have a doubt about the Resurrection, (consider) that We created you out of dust, then out of sperm, then out of a leech-like clot (alaqah), then out of a morsel of flesh (mudghah), partly formed and partly unformed, in order that We may manifest (our power) to you; and We cause whom We will to rest in the wombs for an appointed term, then do We bring you out as babes, then (foster you) that ye may reach your age of full strength; and some of you are called to die, and some are sent back to the feeblest old age, so that they know nothing after having known (much). And (further), thou seest the earth barren and lifeless, but when We pour down rain on it, it is stirred (to life), it swells, and it puts forth every kind of beautiful growth (in pairs).
Qur'an 22:5

Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood (alaqah: clot of blood or leech) ; then of that clot We made a (foetus) lump (mudghah: chewed like substance/piece of meat); 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 Allah, the best to create!
Qur'an 23:14


But what is alarmingly missing in the Quranic embryology lecture is the absence of the female egg called ovum. Quran never mentioned the ovary or the female egg in its entire embryology lecture.
This is not something that should be swept under the carpet but critically examined to know why such crucial detail is missing from a book written by an all knowing God.

A fetus is only formed when the sperm unites with the ovum- that is the beginning of Life and fetal formation. The sperm alone cannot achieve it. The koran assumes the only sperm initiates Life and begins the process of fetal development, this is definitely wrong.

This throws up the question does the author of the Quran has serious knowledge gap? Is he actually omniscient as Muslims claim.

Maybe the answer is not as difficult as we think. In the 7th century ancient world when the Quran was written, nobody knew anything about the ovary or ovum. Ancient physicians believe the sperm from the man is the only thing needed to form a fetus. The womb is only considered an incubator. They knew nothing about the female egg.

Maybe the author of the Quran didn't know because people around him didn't know too. Quran after all is simply a reflection of the obvious knowledge gap around it.

N.B- I do not consider this a reason to believe Islam a false religion, it only shows the author of the Quran is not all knowing.

SIRTee15:
Quran is known to cover details about embryology and fetal development. It confirms the process starts with a drop of semen becoming a lump (zygote) multiple times.

He created you (all) from a single Person: then created, of like nature, his mate; and he sent down for you eight head of cattle in pairs: He makes you, in the wombs of your mothers, in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness. such is Allah, your Lord and Cherisher: to Him belongs (all) dominion. There is no god but He: then how are ye turned away (from your true Centre)?
Qur'an 39:6

O mankind! if ye have a doubt about the Resurrection, (consider) that We created you out of dust, then out of sperm, then out of a leech-like clot (alaqah), then out of a morsel of flesh (mudghah), partly formed and partly unformed, in order that We may manifest (our power) to you; and We cause whom We will to rest in the wombs for an appointed term, then do We bring you out as babes, then (foster you) that ye may reach your age of full strength; and some of you are called to die, and some are sent back to the feeblest old age, so that they know nothing after having known (much). And (further), thou seest the earth barren and lifeless, but when We pour down rain on it, it is stirred (to life), it swells, and it puts forth every kind of beautiful growth (in pairs).
Qur'an 22:5

Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood (alaqah: clot of blood or leech) ; then of that clot We made a (foetus) lump (mudghah: chewed like substance/piece of meat); 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 Allah, the best to create!
Qur'an 23:14


But what is alarmingly missing in the Quranic embryology lecture is the absence of the female egg called ovum. Quran never mentioned the ovary or the female egg in its entire embryology lecture.
This is not something that should be swept under the carpet but critically examined to know why such crucial detail is missing from a book written by an all knowing God.

A fetus is only formed when the sperm unites with the ovum- that is the beginning of Life and fetal formation. The sperm alone cannot achieve it. The koran assumes the only sperm initiates Life and begins the process of fetal development, this is definitely wrong.

This throws up the question does the author of the Quran has serious knowledge gap? Is he actually omniscient as Muslims claim.

Maybe the answer is not as difficult as we think. In the 7th century ancient world when the Quran was written, nobody knew anything about the ovary or ovum. Ancient physicians believe the sperm from the man is the only thing needed to form a fetus. The womb is only considered an incubator. They knew nothing about the female egg.

Maybe the author of the Quran didn't know because people around him didn't know too. Quran after all is simply a reflection of the obvious knowledge gap around it.

N.B- I do not consider this a reason to believe Islam a false religion, it only shows the author of the Quran is not all knowing.

I'm not a muslim,which you know. And I'm not an apologist.
The bible contains many scientific and historical errors so why are you picking on Islam when your own religion is a cesspit of confusion and misinformation
The bible talks about a global flood but there is no scientific evidence of it.
It says sun and moon stood still. No evidence
Says people resurrected en masse when Jesus died. No evidence
Leviticus 11:19 lists bats among birds ("flying creeping things", which conflicts with modern biological classification as mammals.Ruminant Designation for Hares and Conies: Leviticus 11:5–6 states that hares and rock badgers "chew the cud" but do not have divided hooves, though they are not actually ruminants.Four-Legged Insects: Leviticus 11:20–23 refers to flying insects that walk on all fours, ignoring the six-legged anatomy characteristic of insects (though some interpretations suggest a distinction for walking versus hopping limbs).
I can go on and on but I'm tired

SIRTee15:
Quran is known to cover details about embryology and fetal development. It confirms the process starts with a drop of semen becoming a lump (zygote) multiple times.

He created you (all) from a single Person: then created, of like nature, his mate; and he sent down for you eight head of cattle in pairs: He makes you, in the wombs of your mothers, in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness. such is Allah, your Lord and Cherisher: to Him belongs (all) dominion. There is no god but He: then how are ye turned away (from your true Centre)?
Qur'an 39:6

O mankind! if ye have a doubt about the Resurrection, (consider) that We created you out of dust, then out of sperm, then out of a leech-like clot (alaqah), then out of a morsel of flesh (mudghah), partly formed and partly unformed, in order that We may manifest (our power) to you; and We cause whom We will to rest in the wombs for an appointed term, then do We bring you out as babes, then (foster you) that ye may reach your age of full strength; and some of you are called to die, and some are sent back to the feeblest old age, so that they know nothing after having known (much). And (further), thou seest the earth barren and lifeless, but when We pour down rain on it, it is stirred (to life), it swells, and it puts forth every kind of beautiful growth (in pairs).
Qur'an 22:5

Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood (alaqah: clot of blood or leech) ; then of that clot We made a (foetus) lump (mudghah: chewed like substance/piece of meat); 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 Allah, the best to create!
Qur'an 23:14


But what is alarmingly missing in the Quranic embryology lecture is the absence of the female egg called ovum. Quran never mentioned the ovary or the female egg in its entire embryology lecture.
This is not something that should be swept under the carpet but critically examined to know why such crucial detail is missing from a book written by an all knowing God.

A fetus is only formed when the sperm unites with the ovum- that is the beginning of Life and fetal formation. The sperm alone cannot achieve it. The koran assumes the only sperm initiates Life and begins the process of fetal development, this is definitely wrong.

This throws up the question does the author of the Quran has serious knowledge gap? Is he actually omniscient as Muslims claim.

Maybe the answer is not as difficult as we think. In the 7th century ancient world when the Quran was written, nobody knew anything about the ovary or ovum. Ancient physicians believe the sperm from the man is the only thing needed to form a fetus. The womb is only considered an incubator. They knew nothing about the female egg.

Maybe the author of the Quran didn't know because people around him didn't know too. Quran after all is simply a reflection of the obvious knowledge gap around it.

N.B- I do not consider this a reason to believe Islam a false religion, it only shows the author of the Quran is not all knowing.

You missed Qur'an 76:2 that uses (نُّطْفَةٍ أَمْشَاجٍ) mixed fluid to describe what man is made from.

And there are narrations where the prophet described the woman fluid as thin and yellow.

jaephoenix:
I'm not a muslim,which you know. And I'm not an apologist.
The bible contains many scientific and historical errors so why are you picking on Islam when your own religion is a cesspit of confusion and misinformation
The bible talks about a global flood but there is no scientific evidence of it.
It says sun and moon stood still. No evidence
Says people resurrected en masse when Jesus died. No evidence
Leviticus 11:19 lists bats among birds ("flying creeping things", which conflicts with modern biological classification as mammals.Ruminant Designation for Hares and Conies: Leviticus 11:5–6 states that hares and rock badgers "chew the cud" but do not have divided hooves, though they are not actually ruminants.Four-Legged Insects: Leviticus 11:20–23 refers to flying insects that walk on all fours, ignoring the six-legged anatomy characteristic of insects (though some interpretations suggest a distinction for walking versus hopping limbs).
I can go on and on but I'm tired

Since u are not a Muslim, I don't understand your headache with the Quran. Let Muslims come here to defend their Quran which is the verbatim word of God.

If u have a problem with the bible, open another thread for that.

This is about the failure to mention female egg in the Quran.
Why did the all knowing God forget to mention the ovary in his extensive embryology lecture in the Quran.

Qasim6:
You missed Qur'an 76:2 that uses (نُّطْفَةٍ أَمْشَاجٍ) mixed fluid to describe what man is made from.

And there are narrations where the prophet described the woman fluid as thin and yellow.

Quran 76.2
˹For˺ indeed, We ˹alone˺ created humans from a drop of mixed fluids, ˹in order˺ to test them, so We made them hear and see.

My friend, ovum is not a fluid and its not thin. its a spherical structure with a firm to solid exterior and a jelly interior.


Your tafsir scholars were reproducing what ancient physicians like Galen believe to be the female semen- yellow and thin fluid while the man is thicker and white.

This should not be difficult, let's stop speaking for the author of the quran. semen and ovary contribute 50:50 to the creation of a fetus. we don't need all this cryptic interpretation for something that is sooo common knowledge.

Qasim6:
You missed Qur'an 76:2 that uses (نُّطْفَةٍ أَمْشَاجٍ) mixed fluid to describe what man is made from.

And there are narrations where the prophet described the woman fluid as thin and yellow.

The egg is not a fluid, u can practically hold it. Doctors hold the egg with forceps and move it around during IVF. IT'S NOT A FLUID. saying the egg is a fluid is bad description and shows profound knowledge gap

SIRTee15:
Quran 76.2
˹For˺ indeed, We ˹alone˺ created humans from a drop of mixed fluids, ˹in order˺ to test them, so We made them hear and see.

My friend, ovum is not a fluid and its not thin. its a spherical structure with a firm to solid exterior and a jelly interior.


Your tafsir scholars were reproducing what ancient physicians like Galen believe to be the female semen- yellow and thin fluid while the man is thicker and white.

This should not be difficult, let's stop speaking for the author of the quran. semen and ovary contribute 50:50 to the creation of a fetus. we don't need all this cryptic interpretation for something that is sooo common knowledge.

Your initial submission was that the author assumes only sperm initiates life and begins the process of fetal development, but you are wrong. The author is very much aware that both the man and the woman bring forth substances that mix together to begin the process of fetal development (Qur'an 76:2), unlike Aristotelian embryology, which opines that the father's semen contains the entire seed of the child while the mother's womb only acts as a vessel.

The content of the ovum is still cytoplasm, which is best described as a semi-fluid, jelly-like substance. You wouldn't expect the Qur'an, whose immediate recipients were 7th-century Arabs, to be using microscopic terms rather than observable phenomena.

And no, we are not speaking for the author of the Qur'an. There are narrations where the Prophet himself mentioned that both the man's and the woman's fluids are responsible for the sex of the child and even the physical traits of the child. Even Abdullah ibn Abbas, who was the cousin of the Prophet and the greatest mufassir, explained nutfah amshaj in Q 76:2 as a mixture of both the man's and the woman's fluid.

Qasim6:
Your initial submission was that the author assumes only sperm initiates life and begins the process of fetal development, but you are wrong.
The author is very much aware that both the man and the woman bring forth substances that mix together to begin the process of fetal development (Qur'an 76:2), unlike Aristotelian embryology, which opines that the father's semen contains the entire seed of the child while the mother's womb only acts as a vessel.

No, the author of the Quran NEVER MENTIONED the fluid comes from woman. Instead it gives a detailed explanation of fetus being from FROM ONLY THE SPERM. NO MENTION OF THE WOMAN.

Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood (alaqah: clot of blood or leech) ; then of that clot We made a (foetus) lump (mudghah: chewed like substance/piece of meat); 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 Allah, the best to create!
Qur'an 23:14

We created you out of dust, then out of sperm, then out of a leech-like clot (alaqah), then out of a morsel of flesh (mudghah), partly formed and partly unformed, in order that We may manifest (our power) to you; and We cause whom We will to rest in the wombs for an appointed term, then do We bring you out as babes......
Qur'an 22:5


THIS IS WHAT THE AUTHOR OF THE QURAN MENTIONED HIMSELF WITHOUT ANY ADDITIVE. HE MADE NO MENTION OF ANY CONTRIBUTION FROM THE WOMAN- THIS IS THE ARISTOTLE THEORY!!!

As we can see, the author of the Quran is telling us how he forms the fetus and for strange reasons, didn't mention the ovum. The ovum is absent. According to the quran, SPERM BECOMES EMBRYO WITHOUT THE OVUM!!!!!

The verse u brought made no mention of any fluid coming from the woman. It only mentions mixed of fluid which of course is an ambiguous statement

Qasim6:
The content of the ovum is still cytoplasm, which is best described as a semi-fluid, jelly-like substance. You wouldn't expect the Qur'an, whose immediate recipients were 7th-century Arabs, to be using microscopic terms rather than observable phenomena.

BUT ACCORDING TO U GUYS HE WAS DESCRIBING COMPLEX COSMOLOGY AND GEOLOGICAL CONCEPT IN THE QURAN to 7th century arabs, IS IT NOT THE SAME BUNCH OF ILLITERATE.
don't u think mentioning the more important female egg will help arabs understand infertility issues better. What's their business with constellation of stars billions of miles away compared to telling arabs about the female egg.

Qasim6:
And no, we are not speaking for the author of the Qur'an. There are narrations where the Prophet himself mentioned that both the man's and the woman's fluids are responsible for the sex of the child and even the physical traits of the child. Even Abdullah ibn Abbas, who was the cousin of the Prophet and the greatest mufassir, explained nutfah amshaj in Q 76:2 as a mixture of both the man's and the woman's fluid.

yes u are.
According to u guys, the author of the Quran is different from the tafsir, and u confirmed this with me in the past when u reject a tafsir narration as false.
and even the explanation in the tafsir is the 2 seed theory of Galen when he said its the fluid from the woman and the man that makes the fetus. He described the fluid as thin and yellow secreted by the body not from the ovary.

And let's pretend as if we don't know the same tafsir mentioned the so called female fluid comes from the sternum
u go fear mental gymnastics.
Galen was wrong and so is the tafsir.

tafsir of Quran 86.5-7
Let people then consider what they were created from! They were˺ created from a spurting fluid, stemming from between the backbone and the ribcage.

Asrar - Kashf Al-Asrar tafsir
He was created of gushing water, emerging from between the loins and the chest.
When the human individual was created, he was created from water thrown and spilled, a water that came forth from the back of the man and from the bones within the woman's breast.


Kathir - Ibn Al Kathir tafsir
(He is created from a water gushing forth.) meaning, the sexual fluid that comes out bursting forth from the man and the woman. Thus, the child is produced from both of them by the permission of Allah.

Due to this Allah says, (Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.) meaning, the backbone (or loins) of the man and the ribs of the woman, which is referring to her chest.

Shabib bin Bishr reported from `Ikrimah who narrated from Ibn `Abbas that he said,
(Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.) "The backbone of the man and the ribs of the woman. It (the fluid) is yellow and fine in texture. The child will not be born except from both of them (i.e., their sexual fluids).'' Concerning Allah's statement.


So according to the "coming to the rescue tafsir", the yellow and thin female fluid is from the rib!!!!!!
attempting to rescue the author of the quran with the tafsir will only make things worse for him not better.
I repeat, allow the author of the Quran speak for himself, don't make things worse for him.

Why is the ovary or female egg not mentioned in the Quran, pls fellow muslims answer the question.

SIRTee15:
Since u are not a Muslim, I don't understand your headache with the Quran. Let Muslims come here to defend their Quran which is the verbatim word of God.

If u have a problem with the bible, open another thread for that.

I have opened a topic about the errors and lies in the bible,years ago. You contributed to that thread but was as usual talking rubbish,and now,you are pretending I haven't made any thread about how useless your bible is. Even the points I made now about your bible,you couldn't counter them
Loo at the thread
https://www.nairaland.com/7659505/book-bible-gaffes

SIRTee15:
No, the author of the Quran NEVER MENTIONED the fluid comes from woman. Instead it gives a detailed explanation of fetus being from FROM ONLY THE SPERM. NO MENTION OF THE WOMAN.

Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood (alaqah: clot of blood or leech) ; then of that clot We made a (foetus) lump (mudghah: chewed like substance/piece of meat); 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 Allah, the best to create!
Qur'an 23:14

We created you out of dust, then out of sperm, then out of a leech-like clot (alaqah), then out of a morsel of flesh (mudghah), partly formed and partly unformed, in order that We may manifest (our power) to you; and We cause whom We will to rest in the wombs for an appointed term, then do We bring you out as babes......
Qur'an 22:5


THIS IS WHAT THE AUTHOR OF THE QURAN MENTIONED HIMSELF WITHOUT ANY ADDITIVE. HE MADE NO MENTION OF ANY CONTRIBUTION FROM THE WOMAN- THIS IS THE ARISTOTLE THEORY!!!

As we can see, the author of the Quran is telling us how he forms the fetus and for strange reasons, didn't mention the ovum. The ovum is absent. According to the quran, SPERM BECOMES EMBRYO WITHOUT THE OVUM!!!!!

The verse u brought made no mention of any fluid coming from the woman. It only mentions mixed of fluid which of course is an ambiguous statement



BUT ACCORDING TO U GUYS HE WAS DESCRIBING COMPLEX COSMOLOGY AND GEOLOGICAL CONCEPT IN THE QURAN to 7th century arabs, IS IT NOT THE SAME BUNCH OF ILLITERATE.
don't u think mentioning the more important female egg will help arabs understand infertility issues better. What's their business with constellation of stars billions of miles away compared to telling arabs about the female egg.



yes u are.
According to u guys, the author of the Quran is different from the tafsir, and u confirmed this with me in the past when u reject a tafsir narration as false.
and even the explanation in the tafsir is the 2 seed theory of Galen when he said its the fluid from the woman and the man that makes the fetus. He described the fluid as thin and yellow secreted by the body not from the ovary.

And let's pretend as if we don't know the same tafsir mentioned the so called female fluid comes from the sternum
u go fear mental gymnastics.
Galen was wrong and so is the tafsir.

tafsir of Quran 86.5-7
Let people then consider what they were created from! They were˺ created from a spurting fluid, stemming from between the backbone and the ribcage.

Asrar - Kashf Al-Asrar tafsir
He was created of gushing water, emerging from between the loins and the chest.
When the human individual was created, he was created from water thrown and spilled, a water that came forth from the back of the man and from the bones within the woman's breast.


Kathir - Ibn Al Kathir tafsir
(He is created from a water gushing forth.) meaning, the sexual fluid that comes out bursting forth from the man and the woman. Thus, the child is produced from both of them by the permission of Allah.

Due to this Allah says, (Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.) meaning, the backbone (or loins) of the man and the ribs of the woman, which is referring to her chest.

Shabib bin Bishr reported from `Ikrimah who narrated from Ibn `Abbas that he said,
(Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.) "The backbone of the man and the ribs of the woman. It (the fluid) is yellow and fine in texture. The child will not be born except from both of them (i.e., their sexual fluids).'' Concerning Allah's statement.


So according to the "coming to the rescue tafsir", the yellow and thin female fluid is from the rib!!!!!!
attempting to rescue the author of the quran with the tafsir will only make things worse for him not better.
I repeat, allow the author of the Quran speak for himself, don't make things worse for him.

Why is the ovary or female egg not mentioned in the Quran, pls fellow muslims answer the question.

Your book said to remove the log in your eyes before removing the speck in another person's
Oga ur bible is riddled with errors. So leave Muslims alone

jaephoenix:
I have opened a topic about the errors and lies in the bible,years ago. You contributed to that thread but was as usual talking rubbish,and now,you are pretending I haven't made any thread about how useless your bible is. Even the points I made now about your bible,you couldn't counter them
Loo at the thread
https://www.nairaland.com/7659505/book-bible-gaffes

The thread where u became so dazed u became confused and disoriented, didn't know who is who anymore.
U even started talking rubbish arguing advanced stage 4 cancer can go into remission without any form of treatment. I hope this is not how u mange your patients OR u were just desperate to discredit the bible u were willing to discredit medicine itself.

@SIRTee15 Galen taught two seeds, placing female semen in the ovaries. Qur'an 76:2 says nutfah amshāj, nothing about Galen, ovaries, or an ovum, and al-Ṭabarī/Ibn Kathīr read it as male and female fluids mixing, so copied Galen has you overreaching. After ovulation, the oocyte itself travels in fluid, fimbriae sweep it into the tube, cilia carry it to the ampulla, where sperm capacitate and meet it; even in IVF, fertilization still needs oocyte, sperm, and fluid medium, sperm alone produces nothing. The Quran isn't a medical textbook, so show me your Bible's equivalent on oocyte transport or capacitation.

SIRTee15:
No, the author of the Quran NEVER MENTIONED the fluid comes from woman. Instead it gives a detailed explanation of fetus being from FROM ONLY THE SPERM. NO MENTION OF THE WOMAN.

Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood (alaqah: clot of blood or leech) ; then of that clot We made a (foetus) lump (mudghah: chewed like substance/piece of meat); 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 Allah, the best to create!
Qur'an 23:14

We created you out of dust, then out of sperm, then out of a leech-like clot (alaqah), then out of a morsel of flesh (mudghah), partly formed and partly unformed, in order that We may manifest (our power) to you; and We cause whom We will to rest in the wombs for an appointed term, then do We bring you out as babes......
Qur'an 22:5


THIS IS WHAT THE AUTHOR OF THE QURAN MENTIONED HIMSELF WITHOUT ANY ADDITIVE. HE MADE NO MENTION OF ANY CONTRIBUTION FROM THE WOMAN- THIS IS THE ARISTOTLE THEORY!!!

As we can see, the author of the Quran is telling us how he forms the fetus and for strange reasons, didn't mention the ovum. The ovum is absent. According to the quran, SPERM BECOMES EMBRYO WITHOUT THE OVUM!!!!!

The verse u brought made no mention of any fluid coming from the woman. It only mentions mixed of fluid which of course is an ambiguous statement



BUT ACCORDING TO U GUYS HE WAS DESCRIBING COMPLEX COSMOLOGY AND GEOLOGICAL CONCEPT IN THE QURAN to 7th century arabs, IS IT NOT THE SAME BUNCH OF ILLITERATE.
don't u think mentioning the more important female egg will help arabs understand infertility issues better. What's their business with constellation of stars billions of miles away compared to telling arabs about the female egg.



yes u are.
According to u guys, the author of the Quran is different from the tafsir, and u confirmed this with me in the past when u reject a tafsir narration as false.
and even the explanation in the tafsir is the 2 seed theory of Galen when he said its the fluid from the woman and the man that makes the fetus. He described the fluid as thin and yellow secreted by the body not from the ovary.

And let's pretend as if we don't know the same tafsir mentioned the so called female fluid comes from the sternum
u go fear mental gymnastics.
Galen was wrong and so is the tafsir.

tafsir of Quran 86.5-7
Let people then consider what they were created from! They were˺ created from a spurting fluid, stemming from between the backbone and the ribcage.

Asrar - Kashf Al-Asrar tafsir
He was created of gushing water, emerging from between the loins and the chest.
When the human individual was created, he was created from water thrown and spilled, a water that came forth from the back of the man and from the bones within the woman's breast.


Kathir - Ibn Al Kathir tafsir
(He is created from a water gushing forth.) meaning, the sexual fluid that comes out bursting forth from the man and the woman. Thus, the child is produced from both of them by the permission of Allah.

Due to this Allah says, (Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.) meaning, the backbone (or loins) of the man and the ribs of the woman, which is referring to her chest.

Shabib bin Bishr reported from `Ikrimah who narrated from Ibn `Abbas that he said,
(Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.) "The backbone of the man and the ribs of the woman. It (the fluid) is yellow and fine in texture. The child will not be born except from both of them (i.e., their sexual fluids).'' Concerning Allah's statement.


So according to the "coming to the rescue tafsir", the yellow and thin female fluid is from the rib!!!!!!
attempting to rescue the author of the quran with the tafsir will only make things worse for him not better.
I repeat, allow the author of the Quran speak for himself, don't make things worse for him.

Why is the ovary or female egg not mentioned in the Quran, pls fellow muslims answer the question.

Bro, I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but you have been chasing shadows. The word that is being translated as sperm in those verses does not literally mean sperm. The word is nutfah, nataph in Hebrew; it literally means just a tiny quantity of liquid/fluid.

Yes, He was describing complex cosmological and geological concepts using language and observable phenomena that could be understood by 7th-century Arabs, and not Einstein's theory or Newton's laws.

Qur'an 76:2 uses mixed fluids which the Muslims have always understood as mixture of both the male and female fluids, there are narrations where the prophet himself said the male and the female fluids determine the sex and physical traits of a child, so I don't understand why you are hell bent on forcing the Aristotle theory of only the sperm is responsible for fetal development on the Qur'an.

SIRTee15:
The thread where u became so dazed u became confused and disoriented, didn't know who is who anymore.
U even started talking rubbish arguing advanced stage 4 cancer can go into remission without any form of treatment. I hope this is not how u mange your patients OR u were just desperate to discredit the bible u were willing to discredit medicine itself.

Lol you now bring up lies to cover your fuckups?
Where was i disoriented? At least now you agree I have created threads about how useless your bible is and you couldn't make any explanations despite the thread making more than 40 pages

What is a thread like this doing here? Islam has a separate section, so isn't that enough. Please, take this to the relevant section.
This is the nonsense Seun and his team have created. "Christianity etc" giving room for such desecration.

jaephoenix:
Lol you now bring up lies to cover your fuckups?
Where was i disoriented? At least now you agree I have created threads about how useless your bible is and you couldn't make any explanations despite the thread making more than 40 pages

All your irrational questions were convincingly answered. But of course u looking for way out until u got dazed and confused.

Qasim6:
Bro, I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but you have been chasing shadows.
.

Shadows bawo. Abi no be u carry tafsir come help Quran.

Qasim6:
The word that is being translated as sperm in those verses does not literally mean sperm. The word is nutfah, nataph in Hebrew; it literally means just a tiny quantity of liquid/fluid.
Semen o , sperm o. Doesn't matter. The question is show me the ovary.

[quote author=Qasim6 post=140742973]Yes, He was describing complex cosmological and geological concepts using language and observable phenomena that could be understood by 7th-century Arabs, and not Einstein's theory or Newton's laws.
.

Indeed, the author of the Quran that thought stars are missiles thrown at the devil so that he can't eavesdrop into heaven.
Qasim I'm 100% sure deep down in within your heart, u know God didn't write the Quran.
U know the author of the Quran is not God, u just doing strong head.

Qasim6:
Qur'an 76:2 uses mixed fluids which the Muslims have always understood as mixture of both the male and female fluids, there are narrations where the prophet himself said the male and the female fluids determine the sex and physical traits of a child, so I don't understand why you are hell bent on forcing the Aristotle theory of only the sperm is responsible for fetal development on the Qur'an.

.[/quote]Yeah, Muslims interpreted as a female fluid driping from the rib.
Say the truth, if u be lecturer, u no go fail those Muslims??
Well I want to know who removed my topic from Islamic question?
Are u guys now saying criticism of Quran devoid of insult will not be entertained here anymore ?

honesttalk21:
@SIRTee15 Galen taught two seeds, placing female semen in the ovaries. Qur'an 76:2 says nutfah amshāj, nothing about Galen, ovaries, or an ovum, and al-Ṭabarī/Ibn Kathīr read it as male and female fluids mixing, so copied Galen has you overreaching. After ovulation, the oocyte itself travels in fluid, fimbriae sweep it into the tube, cilia carry it to the ampulla, where sperm capacitate and meet it; even in IVF, fertilization still needs oocyte, sperm, and fluid medium, sperm alone produces nothing. The Quran isn't a medical textbook, so show me your Bible's equivalent on oocyte transport or capacitation.

Your God is the one giving embryology lecture in the Quran. My God never told us he's a lecturer or tells us he intends to use the scripture as embryology handout.

Pls can u explain why my thread was removed away from Muslim section.
I don't have a problem if u guys are opposed to Islamic criticism but I expect the same treatment be extended to Muslims who open Christian threads

SIRTee15:
Your God is the one giving embryology lecture in the Quran. My God never told us he's a lecturer or tells us he intends to use the scripture as embryology handout.

Pls can u explain why my thread was removed away from Muslim section.
I don't have a problem if u guys are opposed to Islamic criticism but I expect the same treatment be extended to Muslims who open Christian threads

Your title says lecture, not the Quran. If scripture owes us science, your Bible fails in bats as birds, hares chewing cud, four-legged insects. Sure you posted in the appropriate section? Years on this forum, you know where to complain. Dahmie had to point it out.

honesttalk21:
Your title says lecture, not the Quran. If scripture owes us science, your Bible fails in bats as birds, hares chewing cud, four-legged insects. Sure you posted in the appropriate section? Years on this forum, you know where to complain. Dahmie had to point it out.

why is it in the christian section. The topic is for muslims and I opened it in muslim section. why was it moved here. This thread benefit no one but muslims.

SIRTee15:
All your irrational questions were convincingly answered. But of course u looking for way out until u got dazed and confused.

Which irrational questions?
Lemme ask a quick one...which day in creation were plants created? And where was Eve created from?

SIRTee15:
why is it in the christian section. The topic is for muslims and I opened it in muslim section. why was it moved here. This thread benefit no one but muslims.

You opened the thread, I saw it, and as far as I saw you only complained about the move very recently. What's your fuss with Muslims when Christians you share faith with have concerns about their faith and practice? Best to put your house in order first. Seriously, what benefit does this topic have for Muslims outside poking fun and showing off to your Christian brethren here?

SIRTee15:
Shadows bawo. Abi no be u carry tafsir come help Quran.

Yeah, Muslims interpreted as a female fluid driping from the rib.
Say the truth, if u be lecturer, u no go fail those Muslims??
Well I want to know who removed my topic from Islamic question?
Are u guys now saying criticism of Quran devoid of insult will not be entertained here anymore ?

I don't think we should be arguing/having discussion in bad faith, looking for unnecessary gotcha.
when I'm using tafsir, I want to know what source the mufassir is using in explaining a particular verse.
They use the Qur'an to explain Qur'an
They use sayings of the prophet
They use sayings of the prophet companions and their students.
They use Jews and Christians narratives( things like Paul is the messanger mentioned in Qur'an 36:13-14)
They use personal opinions (things like zhul qurnayn is Alexandra the great)

The first 2 are the ones I hold as absolute truth.
Whenever they are using the latter 2, I have every right to accept or reject, and I don't think I need to explain further on why I hold that position.
And whenever I'm approaching religious text(Hebrew Bible and the new testament inclusive) I want to know the meaning of words, I don't just follow translations blindly.
The reason I'm able to debunk things like Waraqa was the one that identify the being in the cave as Jibril.

In the case of the verses you brought to indicate the Qur'an author think it's only sperm that is needed for fetal development, I understand some translation use sperm for nutfah, some use seeds, and some other use the literal meaning small fluid/liquid.
Qur'an 76:2 uses (nutfah amshaj) mixed fluid, which the Muslims(companions, students of companions) have always understood as a mixture of both the male and female fluids, there are sayings of the prophet that clearly indicates both the male and female fluids are needed for fetal development.
That is end of discussion!


If there is just 1 person on this earth, that more than 100% believe that the creator of everything that exist is the author of the Qur'an, I am that 1 person. We are not like you that believe everything in the Bible is divinely inspired and at the same time can have errors and mistakes. I don't know how you guys are able to square that, God inspirations with errors.

There is difference between Najm(stars) Kawakib(planetary bodies) and shuhub (meteors, shooting stars) seems you are conflating them.
What is believed to be use as missles in pelting shayatin are shuhub(shooting stars) not Najm(stars)
The Qur'an described what is been use as missles as musabih(luminaries) not Najm(stars).

There are narrations where the prophet use shuhub (shooting stars) to describe what is been use in pelting shayatin. Except what you have problem with is the supernatural claim of pelting devils with shooting stars or the supernatural claim of devils eavesdropping.

jaephoenix:
I'm not a muslim,which you know. And I'm not an apologist.
The bible contains many scientific and historical errors so why are you picking on Islam when your own religion is a cesspit of confusion and misinformation
The bible talks about a global flood but there is no scientific evidence of it.
It says sun and moon stood still. No evidence
Says people resurrected en masse when Jesus died. No evidence
Leviticus 11:19 lists bats among birds ("flying creeping things", which conflicts with modern biological classification as mammals.Ruminant Designation for Hares and Conies: Leviticus 11:5–6 states that hares and rock badgers "chew the cud" but do not have divided hooves, though they are not actually ruminants.Four-Legged Insects: Leviticus 11:20–23 refers to flying insects that walk on all fours, ignoring the six-legged anatomy characteristic of insects (though some interpretations suggest a distinction for walking versus hopping limbs).
I can go on and on but I'm tired

nonsense, garbage. The sun stood still because of the children of Israel.

Plus1234:
nonsense, garbage. The sun stood still because of the children of Israel.

So is there historical evidence it happened?

Qasim6:
I don't think we should be arguing/having discussion in bad faith, looking for unnecessary gotcha.

I'm gone beyond arguing for bad faith or gotcha. I have taken time to study theology of Islam and I'm convinced it's a false religion. This is not out of spite or because I'm a Christian but because it's impossible for Quran to the authored by God and Islam theology cannot be reconciled with historical reality. The excuse u Muslim apologists give shows u are coping with post knowledge awareness and indirectly admitting the Quran should have reflected that knowledge.

Some things can't just be reconciled no matter how hard u guys try to crack it or explain it away.
The knowledge gap in the Quran is too loud for me just to ignore. I would be deceiving myself to beleive Quran is from God if these knowledge gaps are not convincingly reconciled

1. Allah clearly said he's not a Father to anybody and cursed those who say he's a Father. That's how much he hates that term. Yet historically God is called Father in endearing terms by both Jews and Christian. And previous scriptures show God told believers to call him Father.

2. Quran clearly denied Jesus being Son of God, that's weird because Jesus being the Messiah automatically makes him Son of God. This is according to ancient Jewish understanding of Psalm 2 where it says

He said to me, "You are my Son, today I have become your Father"

Ancient Jews believe this verse is a messianic prophecy according to the Jewish Talmud. So Jesus saying he's the Son of God is not out of place at all if he's the messiah.

This according to Jews themselves NOT Christians, messiah is meant to be the Son of God!!!!
So how can Jesus be the messiah when he's not the Son of God.

3. The core belief of xtianity wasn't addressed. Jesus being the saviour. Christian theology is centred around Jesus Christ is the messiah who has come as the saviour of the world.
Jesus being God or Trinity which Quran spent hours addressing is not key to xtianity belief at all. U can reject Trinity or deny Jesus is God and still make heaven- if u have not been properly educated on the divinity of Christ. We have unitarian xtians who reject Jesus as God and Trinity.
If Allah has no problem with me believing Jesus is my saviour and my salvation is thru him, why then do I need Muhammed!!!!!

5. Let's not get started with the injeel and the Torah. That's a whole different kettle of cankerworms.
Quran clearly told the Jews not to choose and pick what to follow about the Torah but to beleive everything in it. So if Allah is saying Jews should beleive everything in the Torah, why are Muslims saying some part of the Torah is corrupt. Is Allah not aware some part of Torah with the Jews is corrupt. Is Allah telling them to also follow those corrupts part!!!!!

Now let's talk about injeel.
According to the Quran, Jesus said someone is coming after me called Ahmad. Jesus confirmed a messenger called Ahmad is coming after him according to the Quran. This statement of Jesus should be in the injeel if we are to follow the Islamic paradigm.
The problem is none of the sect of early christians- Jewish Christians, Pauline Christians, gnostic or gentiles Christians mentioned this messenger called Ahmad who is to come after Jesus.
If Jesus actually told his disciples that a messenger is coming after him, it will be in the injeel and it's something Jesus disciples will take seriously and look forward to.
None of the disciples of Jesus ever taught that a messenger called Ahmad will come after Jesus...none.
There is no indication or evidence anywhere in early church history that shows they were waiting for a future messenger as authorised by Jesus.
None of the 5 ancient Episcopal churches established by different apostles of Christ in Rome- Peter, Antioch- Peter and Paul, Alexandra- Mark, Jerusalem- James and Constantinople - Andrew taught Jesus said a messenger is coming after him. This fact was completely oblivious to early believers yet it's suppose to be in the gospel Jesus revealed and preached.
How fast and how badly the injeel could have been so corrupted that early Christ followers had no knowledge of this vital information should be regarded as one of the biggest mystery of the Islamic Injeel.
Jesus preached he will be coming back, his disciples believed it and eagerly awaited him until their death. They never stopped believing and they preached it.
According to injeel of the Muslims, Isa preached a messenger called Ahmad will come after him. None of disciples of Jesus spoke about this person, no one waited for another messenger called Ahmad. All the ancient church writings and Gospels has no passage where Jesus said a messenger called Ahmad is coming after him. None.
Yet it's suppose to be in the injeel brought by Jesus. An injeel likely given to James the head of Jerusalem church. But we have no Jewish Christian writing telling us of this awaited messenger.
How fast the injeel was corrupted to have this important detail removed is the real abracadabra of Islamic Injeel.

Finally is the term messiah itself. It's very obvious the Quran has no clue who the messiah is and what it's meant to accomplish.
The summary of messiah expectation according to pre Christian Jewish theology are The messiah shall be king, establish the kingdom of God and reign over the kingdom, bring salvation to humanity by bringing them to the knowledge of one true God.
That's the job of the messiah when he comes.
Now if Jesus is the messiah as confirmed by the Quran, then Jesus would have brought salvation to mankind and establish the kingdom of God here on earth. So what exactly is Muhammed meant to do Duplicate the mission of the messiah??
Why is Allah sending 2 messengers for the same mission!!!!
The obvious answer is the Quran has no proper understanding of the messianic mission.
I'm sure u can appreciate my dilemma with Islam and the Quran. Unfortunately, I do not see myself believing what is glaringly a falsehood.
My rejection of Islam has absolutely nothing to do with my xtian faith. Rather it has everything to do with lack of evidence supporting Quranic or Islamic claim.

Qasim6:
There is difference between Najm(stars) Kawakib(planetary bodies) and shuhub (meteors, shooting stars) seems you are conflating them.
What is believed to be use as missles in pelting shayatin are shuhub(shooting stars) not Najm(stars)
The Qur'an described what is been use as missles as musabih(luminaries) not Najm(stars).

There are narrations where the prophet use shuhub (shooting stars) to describe what is been use in pelting shayatin. Except what you have problem with is the supernatural claim of pelting devils with shooting stars or the supernatural claim of devils eavesdropping.

Ok let's grant Quran meant meteors. Do u know what meteors are They are not light, they are space rocks. They have no light or emit any light.

They are called shooting stars because of the flash of light and glowing trail created when that space rock plunges through Earth's atmosphere and heats up from air friction (usually occurring in the mesosphere at altitudes of 76–100 km).

This happen only when they enter our atmosphere and come in contact with air pressure. This doesn't happen in space where air is very thin or nil at all. Thus they don't produce heat or emit light in space. This only happen when they enter our atmosphere.

So your Quran is still wrong calling these bland rocks constellation lamps or light because they are not.

If u want to argue for metaphor, that's fine. But I want to know the criteria used in determining when a description in the Quran is metaphor and when it's literal.
When Quran says iron fell down from the sky, is that a metaphor or literal.
When Quran says the sun sets in a muddy pond, should that be regarded as metaphor or literal.
Or Muslims first check the science books to see what makes sense in the Quran b4 applying metaphorical or scientific miracle to a verse.

Besides, pre Islamic arabic poets already wrote meteors are shooting stars thrown at shatayn to prevent him eavesdropping.
Since we now know that is wrong, why should the Quran repeat such false statements metaphorical or not. Why is Quran a book from all knowing God repeating wrong statements coming from men

Qasim6:
Bro, I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but you have been chasing shadows. The word that is being translated as sperm in those verses does not literally mean sperm. The word is nutfah, nataph in Hebrew; it literally means just a tiny quantity of liquid/fluid.

Yes, He was describing complex cosmological and geological concepts using language and observable phenomena that could be understood by 7th-century Arabs, and not Einstein's theory or Newton's laws.

Qur'an 76:2 uses mixed fluids which the Muslims have always understood as mixture of both the male and female fluids, there are narrations where the prophet himself said the male and the female fluids determine the sex and physical traits of a child, so I don't understand why you are hell bent on forcing the Aristotle theory of only the sperm is responsible for fetal development on the Qur'an.

The female ovum is not a fluid. What is a fluid is the female orgasmic fluid and it plays no part in fertility. A woman can be sterile that is producing no eggs and still ejaculate the fluid while we've seen victims of rape get pregnant
It's common knowledge that women don't produce that fluid during forced intercourse
Your quran lied