Wednesday, December 24, 2008

Surah 86:5-7 and the Formation of Sperm

Muslims often claim that the Qur'an is a scientific masterpiece. Yet to anyone who isn't already a Muslim, it's difficult to understand how Muslims can make such a claim. The Qur'an is filled with statements which, if taken at face value, are completely false. Let's consider one such passage. Indeed, let's play a game that I'd like to call: "Out-Answer Ali."

"Now let man but think from what he is created! He is created from a drop emitted--proceedings from between the backbone and the ribs." (Surah 86:5-7)

In his famous commentary on the Qur'an, Abdullah Yusuf Ali tries to explain this obvious error on Muhammad's part. Here's Ali's footnote:

"A man's seed is the quintessence of his body. It is therefore said metaphorically to proceed from his loins, i.e., from his back between the hipbones and his ribs. His backbone is the source and symbol of his strength and personality. In his spinal cord and in the brain is the directive energy of the central nervous system, and this directs all action, organic and psychic. The spinal cord is continuous with the Medulla Oblongata in the brain."

Notice that Ali doesn't even come close to explaining Muhammad's error. "The spinal cord is continuous with the Medulla Oblongata . . ." What in the world does this have to do with Muhammad's claim that sperm come from the area between the spinal cord and the ribs?

So who's going to out-answer Ali? Can my Muslim friends show that sperm really do come from between the backbone and ribs? (Note: I don't really care that the Qur'an contains scientific errors. The point here is that Muslims can't base their belief in the divine inspiration of the Qur'an on it's supposed scientific accuracy. If Muslims want a defense of the Qur'an, they'll have to look somewhere other than science.)

For more on the Qur'an and science, see Answering Islam's page here.

73 comments:

Unknown said...

Dr. Zakir Naik writes:In embryonic stages, the reproductive organs of the male and female, i.e. the
testicles and the ovaries, begin their development near the kidney between the spinal column and the eleventh and twelfth ribs. Later they descend; the female gonads (ovaries) stop in the pelvis while the male gonads (testicles) continue their descent before birth to reach the scrotum through the inguinal canal. Even in the adult after the descent of the reproductive organ, these organs receive their nerve supply and blood supply from the Abdominal
Aorta, which is in the area between the backbone (spinal column) and the ribs. Even the lymphatic drainage and the venous return goes to the same
area.

The Encarta Encyclopedia article on the formation of the testes confirms, "In man the testis is an oval organ about 5 cm (about 2 in) long. During embryonic development it is located in the abdominal cavity, but about a month before birth it normally descends into a pouch of skin called the scrotum. Each testis contains about 800 narrow twisting tubes, called seminiferous tubules, that are lined with cells that, upon maturation, divide to form the sperm. The seminiferous tubules merge and form a larger tube, the epididymis. Sperm travels from the testis through the epididymis to the vas deferens, which carries the sperm to the urethra. Sperm exits from the urethra during ejaculation (the release of semen during orgasm). In man the sex hormone produced by the testis is testosterone, which controls the growth of the male reproductive system and stimulates the development of the male secondary sexual characteristics, such as the growth of the beard, the deepening of the voice, and the male contours of the body"

Unknown said...

Also worth seeing is the following article by Dr. Munir Munshey

http://answering-christianity.com/munir_munshey/semenproduction_rebuttal.htm

Anonymous said...

I think I have seen this before:
Third, Nadir quoted surah 21:33, which says that the sun and moon have orbits. He also said that the verse requires no interpretation, since it’s so obviously true. The problem is that it requires a great deal of interpretation. In fact, without adding some interpretation, this verse is a scientific error. It’s the earth that orbits the sun, not the other way around. As I pointed out in the debate, the only way we could say that the sun has an orbit is if we say that, since the Milky Way is spinning, the sun will eventually travel all the way around the galaxy, and this is a kind of “orbit.” But I also said that Muslims would have to show that this is what the Qur’an meant. For if we take the verse at face value, it sounds like the sun and moon are orbiting the earth, and in the case of the sun, this is false. So does this count as “conclusive proof” of the reliability of the Qur’an?

This is very similar, since Hippocrates came up with the idea that sperm passed through the kidneys into the penis, eleven centuries before Muhammed. This view of the origin of sperm was accepted for centuries.
There is no reason why we shouldn't believe that this is the origin of this mistake.

Anonymous said...

Ibn, this looks like a very poor attempt of damage limitation.

Anonymous said...

I just looked up answering-islam and I think this is a brilliant summary of "Why scientific knowledge in scripture is no argument":

* The Qur’an consists of approximately 6,400 verses.

* Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that 10% of these can be cleverly interpreted so that they appear to contain "science".

* Therefore we have 640 verses for our source material.

Unknown said...

Matthew, how is Surah 21:33 relevant to this topic?

Regarding Hippocrates, I don't see how you can compare his theory with what the Quran says and then conclude that the former was the source of the latter. For starters, the Quran doesn't say "sperm passed through the kidneys into the penis". In fact, the Arabic words for sperm and kidneys do not even appear in the Surah.

Unknown said...

And neither does the Arabic word for "penis".

Anonymous said...

And the word for "heliocentrism" is also not mentioned in the Quran.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Now let man but think from what he is created! He is created from a drop emitted--proceedings from between the backbone and the ribs." (Surah 86:5-7)

The point is not whether the Qur'an refers to kidneys or not not. What is vital here is the location. The fact that pre-islamic scientists saw this particular location as vital for the activation of sperm production.

Here is a references to Aristotle, in his 'History of Animals' in his research upon animals from which their conclusion on human atonomy was often envisaged, it may shed some light on the issue from the mindset of those who ruled science prior to the composition of the Qur'an:


"After these organs come the 'kidneys', and these are placed close to the backbone, and resemble in character the same organ in kine. In all animals that are provided with this organ, the right kidney is situated higher up than the other. It has also less fatty substance than the left-hand one and is less moist. And this phenomenon also is observable in all the other animals alike.

Furthermore, passages or ducts lead into the kidneys both from the great vein and from the aorta, only not into the cavity. For, by the way, there is a cavity in the middle of the kidney, bigger in some creatures and less in others; but there is none in the case of the seal. This latter animal has kidneys resembling in shape the identical organ in kine, but in its case the organs are more solid than in any other known creature. The ducts that lead into the kidneys lose themselves in the substance of the kidneys themselves; and the proof that they extend no farther rests on the fact that they contain no blood, nor is any clot found therein. The kidneys, however, have, as has been said, a small cavity. From this cavity in the kidney there lead two considerable ducts or ureters into the bladder; and others spring from the aorta, strong and continuous. And to the middle of each of the two kidneys is attached a hollow sinewy vein, stretching right along the spine through the narrows; by and by these veins are lost in either loin, and again become visible extending to the flank. And these off-branchings of the veins terminate in the bladder. For the bladder lies at the extremity, and is held in position by the ducts stretching from the kidneys, along the stalk that extends to the urethra; and pretty well all round it is fastened by fine sinewy membranes, that resemble to some extent the thoracic diaphragm. The bladder in man is, proportionately to his size, tolerably large.

To the stalk of the bladder the private part is attached, the external orifices coalescing; but a little lower down, one of the openings communicates with the testicles and the other with the bladder. The penis is gristly and sinewy in its texture. With it are connected the testicles in male animals, and the properties of these organs we shall discuss in our general account of the said organ."

For me here it is time for the Christmas celebration, I shall be back on here probably tomorrow or the day after tomorrow.

Merry Christmas everyone and may God bless you all.

MP said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
MP said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
MP said...

Saying that "sperm" proceeds from between the backbone and the ribs because "testicles and the ovaries, begin their development near the kidney between the spinal column and the eleventh and twelfth ribs" (which is nor confirmed -- the location between kidney and backbone -- in the Encarta quotation... Looool... what a spin doctor... Ibn is... Loooool....), is something like saying urine comes from inbetween the heart and the lungs just because in embryonic stages the kidney is closer then ever to the heart and the lungs... Looool... these muslims are full of it... Loooool... they can even try to prove that their mother is a man if that was convenient to their apologetic goals... forget the proof that Qur'an is from God due to it's supposed scientific accuracy... That's a joke...

Merry Christmas to all of you...

Unknown said...

Alforecca:Saying that "sperm" proceeds from between the backbone and the ribs

No one said that.

MP said...

Ooops... No one his saying that the "Formation of Sperm" (the latest's title in this Blog) happens "between the backbone and the ribs" (Surah 86:5-7)????????

So why were you so hasty in quoting Zakir Naik (who, by the way, looks like never condemned the latest bombings is the city where he lives…) and Encarta?

The only point of this present debate is to try to figure why Muhammad said (and I’ll be quoting, once again, Professor Wood) “that sperm come from the area between the spinal cord and the ribs”… hummmmm… are you saying that Surah 86:5-7 doesn’t refer to “sperm”? Could you explain it better?

Merry Christmas to you also Ibn…

David Wood said...

Yes, the fluid Muhammad refers to must include sperm. Otherwise, it wouldn't count as the emitted fluid from which man is created. Thus, sperm, according to 86:7, must come from between the backbone and ribs.

Dk said...

Ibn,

Zakir Naik can come up with his red herrings all he wants, the verse has nothing to do with embryonic development, the Quran has many passages on that subject none of which mention the origination of testes or the forms there of during the fetal or emmbroynic deveolpment.

Furthermore, if Allah uses the word "create" he would be wrong, he should check in with the first law of thermodynamics which says neither matter nor energy can be created or destroyed, thus human reproduction (including sperm formation) is not evidence for Allahs claims of creation after all but evidence against Allah for not understanding energy changes form but is not created when sperm are formed.

btw Zakir Naik was SMASHED by Dr. William Campbell

Unknown said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said...

Wood:Yes, the fluid Muhammad refers to must include sperm. Otherwise, it wouldn't count as the emitted fluid from which man is created. Thus, sperm, according to 86:7, must come from between the backbone and ribs.

The Quran is very specific about the terms it uses. The Arabic word for sperm is "nutfah", and that does not appear anywhere in Surah 86. As Dr.Munir Munshey explains, "The Quran does not use the word ‘sperm’, nor the word ‘semen’, nor does it say anything about the production of semen or sperm. The emphasis is clearly on the word ‘daafiq’, the surging, the welling out, the pouring forth, the shedding, and the flowing out of the fluid. Simply put, it is the ejaculate that fertilizes"

DK:Furthermore, if Allah uses the word "create" he would be wrong, he should check in with the first law of thermodynamics which says neither matter nor energy can be created or destroyed, thus human reproduction (including sperm formation) is not evidence for Allahs claims of creation after all but evidence against Allah for not understanding energy changes form but is not created when sperm are formed.

Not that I agree with you, but what would you say if I said the derivative of the Arabic word "Khuliq" which has been translated as "Created" can also mean to shape, form or mold?

DK:btw Zakir Naik was SMASHED by Dr. William Campbell

Yeah, he was smashed so bad that during the rebuttal period, Dr.William Campbell admitted that he had no response to any of the points Naik raised, simply saying that he doesn't agree with them and that its up to the audience to decide the rest, and proceeded to talk about so called prophecies in the bible, as if that was relevant to the discussion. Funny joke, DK.

MP said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
MP said...

Ibn said: The emphasis is clearly on the word ‘daafiq’, the surging, the welling out, the pouring forth, the shedding, and the flowing out of the fluid. Simply put, it is the ejaculate that fertilizes

so, may I ask: does de 'daafiq'/دَافِقٍ/ejaculation proceeds from between the backbone and the ribs?

By the way... دَافِقٍ is not a verb... it really means "seminal fluid"... no doubt about that... or do you think men are created from water?

but even if you want to say it only means "a fluid", does it proceed from between the backbone/loins and the ribs/spine?

or are you simply saiyng that the force that originates de projection of دَافِقٍ cames from between the backbone/loins/الصُّلْبِ and the ribs/spine/التَّرَائِبِ?

According to you, the present sura is focusing in the liquid that is ejaculated... but is that liquid (that creates/خُلِقَ men) produced/issued/يَخْرُجُ? between the backbone/loins/الصُّلْبِ and the ribs/spine/التَّرَائِبِ?

Or are you simply saying that man is created from a force that proceeds between the backbone/loins/الصُّلْبِ and the ribs/spine/التَّرَائِبِ?

I’ll be waiting to a clarification from you…

In the meanwhile here are some scientific answers to all those questions…

1) The sperm is produced in the testes; in the seminal vesicle; in the bulbourethral glands and in the prostate... and not all of these organs are in the pelvic cavity (between the backbone/loins/الصُّلْبِ and the ribs/spine/التَّرَائِبِ)!!!

2) The only element from the seminal fluid that can fertilize (the spermatozoids… only element in the sperm that as cellules…) are produced in the test… so the true essence of the fertilization action that creates man is from the tests… are they in the pelvic cavity (between the backbone/loins/الصُّلْبِ and the ribs/spine/التَّرَائِبِ)???

3) during coitus semen comes from, almost simultaneously, from that four organs… not all of them are located between the backbone/loins/الصُّلْبِ and the ribs/spine/التَّرَائِبِ...

4) the force to make an ejaculation originates way above the pelvic cavity… and it even involves muscles from the legs…

by the way, and finally:

a) you could do better than simply quoting Munir Munshey’s rebut to Sam… it’s appalling… even a 15 years old student could do better!!!
b) are you speaking of the same debate between Zakir Naik and William Campbell that I saw? are there more than one? In the one I saw Naik was trully shattered...

Merry Christmas to you all, and may Jesus, our savior and God, show the light of true to all who live in darkness!!!

Unknown said...

Alforecca:so, may I ask: does de 'daafiq'/دَافِقٍ/ejaculation proceeds from between the backbone and the ribs?By the way... دَافِقٍ is not a verb... it really means "seminal fluid"... no doubt about that... or do you think men are created from water?

I have here before me The Hans Wehr Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic. As listed on p.286, the meanings of "dafiq" are: bursting forth, breaking out, erupting, gushing, torrential. There is absolutely no mention of seminal fluid in any of the variants of "dafaqa" .

Looks like you couldn't pull a fast one on me!

The rest of your deceptive questions are structured around the assumption that the Quran is speaking about the production of semen in Surah 86. As pointed out earlier, this is not the case.

Regarding your derogatory statements about Dr.Munshey, it is obvious that you are trying to create a negative impression of the savant in the mind of the readers so as to discourage them from examining his article for themselves. Your behavior is strikingly similar to that Abu Lahab's.

And as for Naik's debate with Campbell, your statement that the former was shattered is about as believable as a square circle.

MP said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
MP said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
MP said...

No Ibn...

it's you that said that (by quoting from the awful apologetic effort from Zakir Naik...) «‘daafiq' (...) is the ejaculate that fertilizes» that clearly stated that Qur'an 86 is talking of semen... what other else fluid ejaculated can fertilize and create a human being?

And yes… دَافِقٍ can also mean “seminal fluid”… that’s the translation that Muhammad Asad gives in his “taqqiya” free translation…

Or are you simply saying – following Zakir Naik thesis – that is the “action of ejaculation” what is being referred in the Qur'an 86:5-7?

Although one question remains: isn’t the Qur'an 86:5-7 referring to the creation of man?

I think so… (or maybe you can prove otherwise…).

Then I ask: where in man’s body (not referring to the place to where it happens…) happens the “action of ejaculation”?

Where is that action originated?

From where, in other words, is issued that “gushing fluid”?

This time I won’t give an answer so you may have time to give one to all of us…


And please, after your changing over from Zakir Naik to Munir Munshey arguments, could you, please, explaine to all of us, the purpose of your quotation of Zakir Naik… In the case you’re really trying to clarify what Qur'an 86:5-7 says…


About my qualification of Zakir Naikis rebuttal… well… that’s the case… everyone can see it in
www.answering-christianity.com/munir_munshey/semenproduction_rebuttal.htm...

It’s a joke… a complete joke… he doesn’t really talk about the principal point in this subject… neither do you Ibn… just building sand castles around the sea… perhaps with the answers (not their disqualifications…) you will give us all you can prove that I’m wrong in your case…

about the debate between Zakir Naik and William Campbell... a simple answer was enough... no need to be rude... was there more than one debate?... If not, well, my friend, it’s you who’re trying to prove that 2+2 is 5…

MP said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
MP said...

By the way (not forgetting that we all are expecting some kind of answers -- not disqualifications -- for my priors questions...) you said, quoting, once again, Munir Munshey that "The Quran does not use the word ‘sperm’, nor the word ‘semen’” so… why in sura 53:46 we read: «مِن نُّطْفَةٍ إِذَا تُمْنَى»? what does نُطْفَةً mean? According to Yusuf Ali and, once again, Muhammad Asad, it means “sperm”… see their translations of sura 75:37 and 76:2…

Unknown said...

AlForecca:And yes… دَافِقٍ can also mean “seminal fluid”… that’s the translation that Muhammad Asad gives in his “taqqiya” free translation…

Muhammad Asad translated "maein" as seminal fluid, not "dafiq". Does that mean 'seminal fluid' is an accurate translation of "maein"? No. It is obvious that like you, he also misunderstood the passage, thinking that a gushing fluid refers to semen.

If you think otherwise, produce an Arabic dictionary that says "dafiq" means seminal fluid. I took the trouble of giving you references; you should support your assertion likewise.

As for "taiqyyah", you clearly don't know what it means. According to Gordon D Newby's, "A Concise Encyclopedia of Islam", it is a practice mainly among the Shiite and Druze that involves dissimulation to protect oneself from harm. Check up the wikipedia article in which "taqiyyah" is presented exclusively as a Shiite practice. It is not, as you erroneously believe, a ploy to win debates at all costs or to promote a religion.

The rest of your post is just as circular as the rest. I have nothing further to say to you.

Unknown said...

Alforecca:y the way (not forgetting that we all are expecting some kind of answers -- not disqualifications -- for my priors questions...) you said, quoting, once again, Munir Munshey that "The Quran does not use the word ‘sperm’, nor the word ‘semen’” so… why in sura 53:46 we read: «مِن نُّطْفَةٍ إِذَا تُمْنَى»? what does نُطْفَةً mean? According to Yusuf Ali and, once again, Muhammad Asad, it means “sperm”… see their translations of sura 75:37 and 76:2…

You are quoting Dr.Munshey out of context, an indication that you haven't actually read his article. He was referring to Surah 86, not the Quran as a whole.

"Nutfah" means "sperm", and there is no mention of it in Surah 86.

Nabeel Qureshi said...

In order to validate this statement in the Quran, Muslims either make horrendously unscientific statements or horrendously skew the verse. Indeed, this is what they must do if they are even going to begin to vindicate this claim in the Quran.

NOTE: I do not mean Muslims can't take a far-fetched response, add a touch of relevant medical terminology, sprinkle in a tone of authority, throw it all in a blender and come up with something that will convince themselves of their position. Of course they can do that - they do that all the time and that's what they're doing here.

What they can't do is take the statement at face value and show how it is even remotely accurate, let alone a scientific miracle.

Here's an example of what I mean: "Between the ribs and the backbone" does not translate out to "pelvis"! Yet this is what Muslims must attempt to establish as a given in order to claim that the Quran is accurate.

I would write more now, but I'm considering writing a full-fledged response to this verse within the week.

MP said...

Ibn...

still waiting for your answers... 4 question, 4 expected answers… simple as that… not circular… straight as a line… don’t run away… just give a simple answer to all of them… unless you can’t do so…

isn’t the Qur'an 86:5-7 referring to the creation of man?

I think so… (or maybe you can prove otherwise…).

Then I ask: where in man’s body (not referring to the place to where it happens…) happens the “action of ejaculation”?

Where is that action originated?

From where, in other words, is issued that “gushing fluid”?

no I'm not misquoting your source... it clearly says: "The Quran does not use the word ‘sperm’, nor the word ‘semen’” ... The Quran doesn't use... doesn't say that in sura 86 the Quran doesn't use... bogus argumentation from you... Ibn...

About Taqqiya... That's only one opinion... and yes... giving misleading translations to avoid being condemned (and suffer “harm”…) by the entire non-muslim world is taqqiya...

No I don't have an Arabic dictionary to quote... but I trust in the translation of the Quran that are used by english speaking muslims... or are they misleading?

Sure one translation is only valid when it's supporting our opinion... isn't that so Ibn? Poor argumentation... It doesn't attest my opinion, so the translator was mistaken…

Unknown said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

I am also writing a full summary and critic of Ibn and his circular debating and I would say absurd interpretation.

However, there is a good a article written on the subject here:

http://www.wikiislam.com/wiki/Qur'an_and_Semen_Production

Obviously Zakir Naik's explanation is not scientific accurate and furthermore Naik's interpretation is but one seven different muslim interpretations.

I would also like Ibn to elaborate on this a bit further:

What fluid is it that is emitted and when emitted creates a human being? Seed? Or urine, water, swet, soda?

What I mean is, in the context of the passage, what else is the author referring to?

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

The context of Sura 86: 5-7 is clearly that of semen.

However if we are to be more specific about the meaning fo the word 'dafiq' would it not be an idea to check out Edward William Lane's Arabic-English Lexicon (Dictionary), which supposedly is the best dictionary on Qur'an and its words, rather than a dictionary of modern written Arabic such as The Hans Wehr Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic, which I am sure is a good dictionary too.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

There are a number of other passages in the Qur'an that describe semen as fluid. It seems that Ibn and the Islamic missionaries he refers to reject only semen from Sura 86: 5-7 since it questions the scientif reliability and accuracy of the Qur'an.

16:4 He created man from a sperm-drop. (Drop of fluid, Pickthall)

32:8 He made his seed from a quintessence of despised fluid.

53:46 (He created) From a drop of seed when it is poured forth. (Pickthall)

56:58 Have ye seen that which ye emit. (Pickthall)

75:37 Was he not a drop of sperm emitted (in lowly form)?

76:2 We create man from a drop of thickened fluid

80:19 From a sperm-drop He hath created him.

Unknown said...

Hogan:There are a number of other passages in the Qur'an that describe semen as fluid. It seems that Ibn and the Islamic missionaries he refers to reject only semen from Sura 86: 5-7 since it questions the scientif reliability and accuracy of the Qur'an.

Not at all. As I said to David earlier, the Quran is very specific about the terms it uses.
As such, it is essential that you consider the difference between "nutfah" and "maeen". Whereas the former means "sperm", the latter means water, fluid or juice. If the Quran in Surah 86 wanted to convey the idea of semen specifically, it would have used "nutfah", not "maeen". Aside from Asad's, I don't know of any translation that has rendered "maeen" as seminal fluid.

Hogan:However if we are to be more specific about the meaning fo the word 'dafiq' would it not be an idea to check out Edward William Lane's Arabic-English Lexicon (Dictionary), which supposedly is the best dictionary on Qur'an and its words, rather than a dictionary of modern written Arabic such as The Hans Wehr Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic, which I am sure is a good dictionary too.

So what's stopping you from verifying the meaning of "dafiq" from Lane's lexicon? I guarantee that even in that dictionary, "dafiq" will appear as a verb.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

ok Ibn

Lets say me and my Christian brothers or sisters on this blog are all wrong as are several of the translators of the Qur'an.

Lets say that the drop or fluid that emitted (obviously by ejaculation in an the act of sexual intercourse)which creates a man and which proceeds from between the backbone and the ribs is not semen.

Can you tell us explicitly what we are dealing with here.

This begins to sound more like an extra-terrestial secret!

What is this liquid? Pleas educate us.

So far you have not attempted to answer this question.

So far we know that 1)the fluid is included 2) that the fluid is emitted 3)and the fluid causes a human being to come into being.

So tell us what is this fluid?

Then we can proceed in our debate.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Ibn wrote:

Not at all. As I said to David earlier, the Quran is very specific about the terms it uses.

Elijah replies:

Let me tell you what the Qur'an is specific about here. It is specific about a fluid that is emitted which consequently causes a human being to come into being.

That is clearly reference to semen being ejaculated in the act of sexual intercourse.

How more specific can the Qur'an be?

Ibn wrote:

As such, it is essential that you consider the difference between "nutfah" and "maeen". Whereas the former means "sperm", the latter means water, fluid or juice.

Elijah replies:

Good grief man! Semen is fluid!

Imagine someone dehydrating, and someone suggests that we give him some fluid. And we answer, that don't have any fluid, we have water, juice, milk and soda.

Yeah, exactly sounds stupith!!!

The Qur'an itself refers to semen as fluid:

76:2 We create man from a drop of thickened fluid

Ibn wrote:

If the Quran in Surah 86 wanted to convey the idea of semen specifically, it would have used "nutfah", not "maeen". Aside from Asad's, I don't know of any translation that has rendered "maeen" as seminal fluid.

Elijah replies:

Read my response above.

Can you please answer me these two questions:

1. Is semen fluid?

2. Which fluid that creates a human except for seminal fluid is Sura 86: 5-7 referring to?

MP said...

I guess Ibn is out of his spin doctor's abilities… wait… soon he will try to say that semen is originated in the brain just because this one is the most excitable organ of the human being… We have seen it before… “my heart has just one colour: red and blue” it all depends on the side from which the wind of my interests is blowing

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

I simply don't see how Ibn is gona get out of this mess.

Anonymous said...

I will repeat my explanation:

Muhammed repeated what people at that time believed about sperm, which is that sperm passed through the kidneys into the penis, based on the thoughts of Hippocrates 11 centuries before Muhammed.

This explanation is still unchallenged.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

indeed!

Unknown said...

Hogan:Let me tell you what the Qur'an is specific about here. It is specific about a fluid that is emitted which consequently causes a human being to come into being.
That is clearly reference to semen being ejaculated in the act of sexual intercourse.....Good grief man! Semen is fluid!....Can you please answer me these two questions:1. Is semen fluid?
2. Which fluid that creates a human except for seminal fluid is Sura 86: 5-7 referring to?


Your argument is as follows:

maeen is fluid
semen is fluid
Therefore, maeen is semen

That's like asserting:

cats have 4 legs
dogs have 4 legs
therefore, cats are dogs

In other words, your argument is invalid on account of being fallacious.

Just because the Surah says that man is created from "maeen" doesn't mean "semen" is being referred to. Along with "nutfah", and dust, "maeen" is an ingredient in the creation of man, according to the Quran.

As for what "maeen" is, refer to Dr.Munir Munshey's article. Although I have my own explanation which does not necessarily agree with his, Dr.Munshey does a pretty good job of examining the verse in question.

Matthew:I will repeat my explanation:

Muhammed repeated what people at that time believed about sperm, which is that sperm passed through the kidneys into the penis, based on the thoughts of Hippocrates 11 centuries before Muhammed.This explanation is still unchallenged.

That's begging the question. You have already assumed that the author of the Quran had sperm in mind.

Unknown said...

BTW Hogan, Surah 86 doesn't say "maeein" is ejaculated. The Arabic word for ejaculate is "yumna" which is derived from "mim-noon-wow". "Yumna" doesn't appear in Surah 86, but "dafiq" does. Dafiq, unfortunately for you, doesn't mean to ejaculate.

MP said...

Ibn said: You have already assumed that the author of the Quran had sperm in mind.

Dude!!! What an empty argumentation... Ibn... just admit you don't want to see the truth...

Sure Muhhamad did'nt know that was semen who could "create" man... (I'm not debating if he has sperm in mind... he had... he was allways with a "chick" in mind... but that's another subject...), so he could say man was created from anything...

But the question remains... What in the -- lets call it this way -- "biological matter" than proceeds from the fluid that is emited by man can generate a human being? And (from) where is that "biological matter" emited?

Ibn... just surrender yourself to the evidences... Muhammad didn't had a clue about what in the man's body could "create" another man/women... The Qur'an is not a scientific book...

Ibn... your resistence to show that you can admit the truth is a proof that islam intoxicates the minds... muslims are allways prepared to say that "black" is "white" is the Quran says so... thats shamefull...

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

We know what the scientist prior islam believed about semen production, which we have already established.

The context of the passage 86: 5-7 is equally clear.

The focus is creation of a human, the material used for such a task is fluid or a drop. This fluid has to be emitted, this fluid proceeds from a location which is between the backbone and the ribs.

You do not need the words semen, ejeculation or intercourse to understand the meaning.

I asked Ibn two very simple questions.

As you will see he answered neither.

I asked:

1. Is semen fluid?

2. Which fluid that creates a human except for seminal fluid is Sura 86: 5-7 referring to?

Rather than answering the question, Ibn continues the same circular arguing:

Ibn writes:

Your argument is as follows:

maeen is fluid
semen is fluid
Therefore, maeen is semen

That's like asserting:

cats have 4 legs
dogs have 4 legs
therefore, cats are dogs

In other words, your argument is invalid on account of being fallacious.

Elijah replies:

We have far more information in Sura 86: 5-7 than your analogy of an animal with four legs allows.

1. We know from the passage that the fluid produces a human.

2. We know from the passage that the fluid has to be emitted.

3. We know that the fluid proceeds from the location between the backbone and the ribs.

The analogy you provide would come closest to fluid running. Yes that could refer to a river, true.

But the passage provides more explanation: the creation of for example.

But ok, if I am wrong here, as I have already said: educate us, what is this fluid? What other fluid that is emitted creates a human being?

That is the answer we have been waiting for the entire time.

Now based on your approach here. You want to show yourself specific on particular words. In this way you intend to prove yourself consistent and at the same time remain faithful to the integrity of the Qur'an.

Now lets try this approach on other passages on the Qur'an.

Remember context and its meaning means nothing according to your approach of Sura 86: 5-7.

Words have to be taken literally and nothing read into them, despite context or logic.

Explanation from other passages in the Qur'an prove nothing and should not be required for explanation.

So here are the three examples:

Such as We send down for those who make division, Those who break the Qur'an into parts." (Sura 15: 90-91)

How do you explain that some are breaking the Qur'an into parts? How do you explain that in Muhammad's there are divisions among the Muslims?

91: 1-2 says: ‘By the Sun and his (glorious) splendour; By the Moon as she follows him

This passage is very clear, the moon follows the moon (remember the Qur'an is very specific). So here we very specifically a confirmation from the Qur'an that the moon follows the sun literally. Since the passage does not provide any other explanation, that is the interpretation we need to accept.

Say, O people of the book! You are not founded on anything until you PERFORM the TORAH and the GOSPEL, and what was revealed to you from your Lord” (Sura 5:68-71)

So based on the modern muslim presumption the previous revelations are corrupt. Why does Allah here encourage me to perform the previous revelations?

Now lets see if you are gona remain consistent, that if you are still gona apply the same type of denial or this time apply context, logic and other passages?

Unknown said...

Hogan:Remember context and its meaning means nothing according to your approach of Sura 86: 5-7.
Words have to be taken literally and nothing read into them, despite context or logic.Explanation from other passages in the Qur'an prove nothing and should not be required for explanation.

This is a gross misconstruction of my methods. I drew the distinction between "nutfah" and "maeen" on the basis of other passages in the Quran. I'm looking at the book holistically whereas you are adamant on projecting your preconceived notions onto Surah 86 without any regard for the niceties in which the relevant terms are employed.

BTW have you read Dr.Munshey's article?

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Ibn wrote:

This is a gross misconstruction of my methods. I drew the distinction between "nutfah" and "maeen" on the basis of other passages in the Quran.

Elijah replied:

Fine, but you are denying that 'nutfah' here refers to 'maeen', since that is the only interpretation based upon the context.

I also compared the passage with other passages in the Qur'an, that merely seem to verify my position:

76:2 We create man from a drop of thickened fluid

Ibn wrote:

I'm looking at the book holistically whereas you are adamant on projecting your preconceived notions onto Surah 86 without any regard for the niceties in which the relevant terms are employed.

Elijah replies:

In fact I am the one considering the context. My so called preconceived notions you refer to are based upon:

1. a fluid that produces a human
2. a fluid that is emitted
3. a fluid that proceeds from a specific location that fits the common typical notion of the semen development among scientists of the same time when the Qur'an was allegedly revealed.

You have so far evaded all these issues and argued that this fluid that creates a human rather refers to water, milk or juice--which is an unbelievably absurd interpretation.

Here is the absurd claim of Ibn:

"As such, it is essential that you consider the difference between "nutfah" and "maeen". Whereas the former means "sperm", the latter means water, fluid or juice."

I have also asked you a number of simple questions, which so far you have avoided:

1. Is semen fluid?
2. Which ofter fluid substance except semen is emitted to create a human being?

Anonymous said...

Ibn, you base your defense on "You can't prove that the author of the Qur'an meant 'sperm' when he talked about the fluid from which humans are created."

I think everyone who reads this concludes that it is obvious.

Muslims torture the language of the Qur'an to make it sound like something scientific, but they reject something that could not be more obvious.

Unknown said...

Your posts are becoming banal, Hogan. Frankly, I am getting tired of them.

Hogan:In fact I am the one considering the context. My so called preconceived notions you refer to are based upon:
1. a fluid that produces a human
2. a fluid that is emitted
3. a fluid that proceeds from a specific location that fits the common typical notion of the semen development among scientists of the same time when the Qur'an was allegedly revealed.You have so far evaded all these issues and argued that this fluid that creates a human rather refers to water, milk or juice--which is an unbelievably absurd interpretation.

The fluid alone doesn't produce the human being. I told you earlier that it is an ingredient, along with nutfah(sperm) and dust. The statement in Surah 86 is akin to saying "I made tea from milk." Is milk all that is needed to make tea? No.

Moreover, the fluid is not "ejaculated". As I said earlier, the Arabic for ejaculation is "yumna" which appears in 53:45-46 and 75:37-39, and not in Surah 86, specifically describing the emission of "nutfah", sperm.

As for the third point, this is where your problem lies. Your are approaching the Quran with the assumption that it is a forgery.

Did you even read Dr.Munshey's article?

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Ibn wrote:

The fluid alone doesn't produce the human being. I told you earlier that it is an ingredient, along with nutfah(sperm) and dust. The statement in Surah 86 is akin to saying "I made tea from milk." Is milk all that is needed to make tea? No.

Elijah replies:

So the particular fluid mentioned does not produce a human being; then what is the passage telling us:

Now let man but think from what he is created! He is created from a drop emitted--proceedings from between the backbone and the ribs." (Surah 86:5-7)

Obviously this debate does not concern Elijah versus Ibn but the Qur'an versus Ibn.

I seem to be the one defending the meaning of the Qur'an here.

Ibn wrote:

'The fluid alone doesn't produce the human being.'

But Sura 86: 5-7 clearly informs us that:

'He is created from a drop emitted'

Ibn consider this drop as a reference to be 'an ingredient, along with nutfah(sperm) and dust'

how can you apply 'maeen' to an ingredient within semen, when semen itself is fluid? Are you mixing with sperm in terms of eggs here? Where does the passage refer to the productive egg in the passage?

What I am arguing here is that neither the Qur'an nor any pre-Islamic scientists differentiated between these, in the sense that the fluid was not the reproductive matter. The Qur'an does not refer to eggs in the passage, nor seed. In fact seed and fluid seemed to associated as one substance elsewhere in the Qur'an. Otherwise you need to show this from the passage. The passage clearly speaks about a fluid that produces a human being. There is no references to egg in the passage. Its the fluid the proceeds and is emitted that produces a human being!

Consider these passages:

16:4 He created man from a sperm-drop. (Drop of fluid, Pickthall)

32:8 He made his seed from a quintessence of despised fluid.

53:46 (He created) From a drop of seed when it is poured forth. (Pickthall)

56:58 Have ye seen that which ye emit. (Pickthall)

75:37 Was he not a drop of sperm emitted (in lowly form)?

76:2 We create man from a drop of thickened fluid

80:19 From a sperm-drop He hath created him.

So whom am I to believe here, Ibn or the Qur'an, these two obviously do not agree?

Ibn wrote:


Moreover, the fluid is not "ejaculated". As I said earlier, the Arabic for ejaculation is "yumna" which appears in 53:45-46 and 75:37-39, and not in Surah 86, specifically describing the emission of "nutfah", sperm.

Elijah wrote:

So just because the word ejaculate is not explicitly mentioned we should assume that ejaculation is not referred to. You just admitted that the references is to the fluid that follows the sperm, such fluid is indeed ejaculated.

So now you are contradicting yourself! Does the passage indicate ejaculation or not? It has to be, otherwise the drop of sperm cannot be emitted right?

Look at these passages:

53:46 (He created) From a drop of seed when it is poured forth. (Pickthall)

75:37 Was he not a drop of sperm emitted (in lowly form)?

76:2 We create man from a drop of thickened fluid

80:19 From a sperm-drop He hath created him.

Ibn wrote:

As for the third point, this is where your problem lies. Your are approaching the Quran with the assumption that it is a forgery.

Elijah wrote:

A written work does not need to be assumed as a forgery to discovery scientific errors. Indeed even forgeries may contain a whole lot of accurate facts.

But you are right, yeah I do consider the Qur'an both an early fabrication and also a later corruption.

Unknown said...

Hogan:But you are right, yeah I do consider the Qur'an both an early fabrication and also a later corruption.

And that's the reason why your latest post is no different from what you "argued" earlier. The same old assertions promoted over and over again.

I won't invest any more of my precious time on you.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

What makes you think that discoveries of scientific errors necessarily relates to forgery?

These are two very different matters!

I think your are running!

MP said...

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said to Ibn:

«I think your are running!»... from the start!!!

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Yeah it makes not sense, I am sure Ibn considers the Bible corrupt, yet he is willing to debate with us about the Bible.

But he refuses to debate with us about the Qur'an since we believe that the Qur'an is a corruption or fabrication.

B said...

Alleged Contradiction between Qur'an [86:5-7] and Embryology: by Islamtoday

Dk said...

Bassam your explanation is false, so is Ibn.

The Quran contains a FACTUALLY incorrect statement.

And there is nothing the Muslim Spin Doctors can do about no matter how many pathetic excuses you retards attempt to come up with.

Your Quran is falsifed. Therefore don't tell us "no one has answered the Qurans challenge" or "No one has shown an error or contradiction in the Quran" this is nothing but blowing smoke.

Next direct the people you propogate dawah to into this threat to show them the truth, that your dawah is nothing but lies and deception.

Fernando said...

Dk said: «Bassam's dawah is nothing but lies and deception»... I was very surprised to see how low coul my friend Bassam descend in his tries to deffende de undefensable!!! It's regretfull!! I'll be prayieng for you, so you became lees scared with the truth!!!

B said...

Dk said: "Bassam your explanation is false, so is Ibn."

Umm, you didn't bother addressing the article that I linked to. How about provide some evidence okay?

Victor said...

Greetings!
Nabeel said: I would write more now, but I'm considering writing a full-fledged response to this verse within the week.(December 26, 2008 1:02 AM)

I, Victor say: I personally would wait to see what you have to offer on this subject - yourself being in the medical field.

Here is my question to all critics of Surah 86/5-7 : the ejaculate (semen and/or ovum?) that gushes forth, as the ayah indicates, does it fall outside the region indicated in the ayah (in between the ribs and backbone/loins)? If it doesn't then stop this bogus claim of scientific inaccuracy.

Let me help you a little. a)Have a look at the pictures in the medical texts where the locations of vas deferens/seminal vesicles and other glands are involved in contributing to the ejaculate matter, b) find out what semen consists of, c)find out where sperm is created/made, d) find out where mature sperm is stored, e) and finally,find out from where (location) sperm is ejaculated during coitus.

Then we can have some meaningful discussions here. I am waiting...

Cristo Te Ama said...

I feel sad for Ibn XD, it would be terrible if i had to defend such a "scientific true"

VinceMcJericho said...

Ibn face it you are wrong plain and simple.

The others are saying the "fluid" must mean "semen". You are saying it doesn't. But if the verse is not talking about semen then what other bodily fluid from a man can create a baby??

That is what the verse is about! Creation! And don't bother telling me about the embryology of the human body. Because it contradicts the verse. In the verse it talks about ejaculate coming from between the backbone and ribs. Since when does a fetus ever ejaculate? It is clearly talking about men who have undergone puberty.

Hence what your God should have said is the fluid came forth from the testes. What kind of a God would get such a thing wrong? It is very basic human anatomy and the facts of life. Therefore Quran was not written by any God and therefore Islam does not have a leg to stand on...

Unknown said...

Dear Author,
Read the Ayah 15-16-17 of Surah 86
If you can't be part of Islam, at-least don't be an enemy.

Peace be upon you.

Thanks.

Unknown said...

SHAH
Salamu Alaykum wa rahmat ALLAH
May ALLAH's blessing be upon u all...

I understand truth is every one's right.. and its good to discuss, as it educates the doubted.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2435039/

Kindly find a link, in which medical science refers on the failures of Semen Parameters if the spinal cord / backbone is injured, whereas the sperms comes from testis as commonly known.

Hope this may educate or persuade all of us.

We share the same space..together..

Unknown said...

Thats the answer in Brief for your Question..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtDp7mTnleA

Unknown said...

Are you blind, does not Allah say in the following verses 86;9 "The Day that all hidden things will be made manifest"? And of a certinty Muslims before had to believe in things they could never know, this is but a test from our Lord. No doubt it is unexplainable, there ISN'T an answer, but maybe it will be figured out from the Grace of our Lord through modern science, for whatever Allah gives to man theres none who can withhold it, and whatever he keeps there's none who can grant. Maybe He will keep it concealed so the disbelievers and hypocrites won't find out until its to late and they're dragged on their face in the hellfire, for my lord is the accomplisher of what He plans. And as for those who think it is a book forged there is a clear challenge placed for you in Surah 2 verse 23 "and if you are in doubt as to what We have revealed from time to time to our servant, then produce a surah like therento, and call your witness or helpers besides Allah, if you are truthful." So produce for us a surah, in eloquent Arabic, like those in the Quran, and present it to us if you claim that Muhammed is a soothsayer. But as my Lord surely says "but if you cannot - and of a surety you cannot - then fear the fire whose fuel is men and stones prepared for the disbelievers" how deluded the disbelievers are from the truth! But they will soon come to know. Is it not enough in the Book that it affirms that at 24 days old the fetus looks like a leech like clot, this at a microscopic level, as found in Surah 22;5?https://maria911.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/embryo-leech.jpg But my Lord is the Most Kind, The Most Merciful, The acceptor of repentance.

sahim said...

explanation of quran 86:5-7 is given here
http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/alleged_contradiction_between_qur_an__86_5_7__and_embryology__by_islamtoday

in short:
the phrase "mâ' dâfiq" (emitted fluid)means both sperm & egg. "backbone" (sulb) and "ribs" (tarâ'ib).Arabs understand the "sulb" to refer to a part of the male body and the "tarâ'ib" to a part of the female. sulb also means "loins" & the word "tara'ib" is so ambiguous that the Companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) could not give it a precise definition.

This is an admission that they do not know for certain what the tarâ'ib are, except that they generally agree it refers to an area of the woman's body. It can apply to any region nearing the ribcage. Therefore, the area of the ovaries, the fallopian tubes, or the uterus can easily fit into the general area that is being indicated by these verses.

What we are dealing with here is a gross error in translation and not a scientific error at all.

Tony Ciano said...

My Dear Beloved Friends, God Loves You! Why? A New Revelation with the Spirit of Truth is here Today to Help All of us know the Truth about God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit, ( The Urantia Book, Revelation 2:17,Free, Online, in all international Languages, and Guided by Archangel Michael, His Trusted Angels, and the Holy Spirit ).A prayer and Blessing for all Good Loving Believers who Wish to share the Truth about Jesus, The Son of God and the Holy Spirit:

For all the Children who are Ruined by shame


Mirror child

The image of a precious dove
Dancing barefoot on the beach
Drinking in love and sunshine
full of smiles
never having to die.

Mere child

Dreaming awhile on a school title
Learning to carry books for miles.

Crayons, pencils, stencils
Nothing you need to do but
Sing and carry the wind on
Your wings.

Mirror child

Like daddy or mommy
Carrying so many burdens for
A little person
All the time

Not able
To catch the spies and
Spiders.

Go back to the skies,
Little dove

And play with the eagles who tamed this land
Until you are a spirit so good and pure
That you will truly guide the directions of our
Bloodied hands.



Tony Ciano said...

Repent

The Word means
Resources of Love
From the heart, soul
And goodness of
Human kind,

To Bear Witness
Of the mind of God,
The Sacred Heart of
Jesus, the savior of our world
Who took your sins
Without waste, suffering
Or eternal death.

Believe in the angels
Of mercy,
For there is no darkness
In the Heart of their love for you
And you will save yourselves
From the veil of darkness
That hides from you
The True Love of our Father
God who embraces his Children without fear.
anger or any spiritual regrets.

Repent of your hate,
Jealousy and lust for power,
Turn away from wars,
Killing and material competition
And know that Jesus, our True Messiah,
Will never leave you in times of Trouble
For His Mercy will save you to keep
Your immortal soul.

There is no True Prophecy today except for Revelation 2:17, known as The Urantia Book, free, online, in all international languages, and prepared for You by Arch Angel Michael J. Christ’s Angels, and the voice of God Channeled to you through the voices of True members of the Church of Christ. Blessings to you, Your Families and all the People you Love. In the name of Jesus and the Holy Spirit, Amen.

Giuseppe Antonio Ciano

@GAC8717

Daniela said...

First of all I would like to say hello to everyone, Muslims, Christians, and atheists involved in this discussion. I respect you all and I respect all of your efforts when trying to discuss on the scientific miracles in Holy Quran.

I know that the following thing that I'm going to say might sound as only arabic speaking persons have a privilege to fully and deeply understand the word of the Merciful. But anyone here discussing some of the arabic words written in the Holy Quran before speaking against it, you should really consider learning some arabic before involving into these types of discussions. Do some research, speak to professionals, try to speak to an Arabic language teacher, someone who dedicated his whole life to a certain filed, an expert.

If you are a polyglot and are able to speak more then one language besides you mother tongue, you would understand that each language has it's particularity and the whole new world contained within it. If you don't fully emerge yourself into it you will never fully understand the little subtleties that occur when comprehending the different language and different point of views on the same world that is surrounding us. Every new language you learn gives you a new insight on environment surrounding us or within us.

I know some of you could say, oh so only if I speak arabic I can really understand the Holy Quran and what the Almighty meant with it, so it seems as it is , a privilege for Arab speakers and excludes other language speakers.

For example, I have studied translation at the University, and believe me it is difficult to convey many times the equivalent meaning into the other language. Many times there is no equivalent, just an approximation. An effort, or a try to get you closer to what it means. Keep that in mind.
Sometimes you get lost in translation, this is a fact, and no on is perfect when translating. There are different styles of translating.

Lastly, try to approach the discussion without any prejudices but as brothers and sisters, after all we all share the same air and habitat right. I'm not saying one is right, or the other is wrong, what I'm trying to do is to shed some light and give you a possible different way of looking at things. Have elastic mind, don't be rigid.

Thank you all,
Daniela

Unknown said...

It has been scientifically proven that a fluid produced between the loins and ribs is mixed with sperm during ejaculation. But for the sake of argument let's say this is not true. However what most Christians who try to say the Qur'an is false misunderstand another truth to this verse from God Allah. Allah says in seperate verses that man is created from a gushing fluid. Then the next verse says coming forth from between the loins and the ribs. Now as said before this verse is true, but have Christians stopped to think that this also being a seperate verse from the previous one, that Allah is referring also to the fact that we as babies in the wombs of our mothers, from which we are emitted, and the womb is between the loins and the ribs?

Unknown said...

tween the loins and ribs is mixed with sperm during ejaculation. But for the sake of argument let's say this is not true. However what most Christians who try to say the Qur'an is false misunderstand another truth to this verse from God Allah. Allah says in seperate verses that man is created from a gushing fluid. Then the next verse says coming forth from between the loins and the ribs. Now as said before this verse is true, but have Christians stopped to think that this also being a seperate verse from the previous one, that Allah is referring also to the fact that we as babies in the wombs of our mothers, from which we are emitted, and the womb is between the loins and the ribs?

Abu Danyal said...

To all the non Muslims and in particular the Christians.finding faults in other books before what do you have to say about hundreds and hundreds blatant contradictions and unscientific verses in the bibles.

Don't pointing out I have a broken tooth when you have broken arms and leg.