ATHIEST(open, anyone can answer), Respond to these facts?

Question

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. (Qur'an 23:12-14).


Dr. Keith Moore was professor and chairman of the Department of Anatomy at the University of Toronto. After reviewing the Qur’anic statements he said: "I am amazed at the accuracy of these statements which were already made in the 7th century AD."

"Such knowledge in the Qur’an points to God as its source. "

READ HOW Dr. Keith Moore, says its correct. How many of you are professors of anatomy????

Answer 1

Simple, The Qur'an was not written by man, it was written by God.

Answer 2

Immortal verses, I just asked a question about keith moore.
Did he really rebuke his statement in the latest edition of his book, saying that this information was actually discovered 400 years earlier by a greek doctor?
Did doctor moore himself convert to islam?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Aq1Sh9OkvezkG27S25o66Xfsy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071018121156AAg9Es5

Answer 3

As an ATHEIST, I'd say that they are interesting "facts" but while very good for the 5th century CE, it is not entirely correct or even even close enough to be considered amazing. The Greeks also had better knowledge of human reproduction.

Kudos for "advanced" knowledge at the time but not proof that Allah exists or that the Qur'an is a trustworthy source of knowledge about him.

Answer 4

Soo....maybe there was a knowledge of human development at that time? People are smarter than you seem to want to give them credit for. That doesn't at all point to the existence of a god, though.

ADDENDUM: What you're attempting now is called 'appeal to authority' - you claim that this person's statement about how accurate the anatomic information was somehow validates the existence of your god, BECAUSE they're a professor and therefore must be smarter than everybody else.

Answer 5

You need to be pretty liberal in your interpretation to think that is a description of conception.

Even prehistoric people understood that sperm is somehow related to the process of creating children, and that children develop and grow in the womb.

It's pretty typical that the woman's role in this whole process is equated to that of "a lump of clay". Many primitive societies grant no genetic role to the mother, who is but a "vessel" for the development of the father's child. You would think it would be perfectly obvious that this is incorrect (since all children inherit some genetic traits from their mothers, sometimes obviously so), but truly controlling patriarchal societies somehow seem to overlook this fact and attribute children entirely to their fathers.

Answer 6

there's a incredible style of hate communities which have shaped because Obama took place of work, possibly they opt for to address to shield themselves? i wager once you wrestle for extremely own gun possession, you anticipate the authorities to be unarmed? sweet.

Answer 7

Da Vinci and Nostradamus were before their time too. Those facts, IF they are accurate, had nothing to do with God/Allah.

Did you know that any religion that claims to be the only way to God is a lie.

Answer 8

Weren't the moors Muslims?

Answer 9

3000 years ago the Greeks described the atom. So what. There were space ships in the old testament. We are not alone, we never were.

Answer 10

That's what you can see from the outside. You don't need a lot of science to see that.

Answer 11

We know the verse you cite is wrong, because you can not create life from clay, sperm and congealed blood.

Do you seriously think that verse is accurate?