REF: virgin birth, what about Cloning ?
-
Peace Alen,
I think that cloning is not possible, i could be wrong, because humans cannot clone a soul and a soul is needed for a body. Maybe we could clone a body, you know, piece by piece, liver, heart, skin, stuff like that.
Time will show.
The God Almighty knows best.Do you mean to say that animals do not have a soul ? because they have been cloned.
Humans have been already cloned but the scientists who cloned them are not openly admitting it and not openly coming out with this knowledge because of the fear of persecution, because cloning humans has been banned by USA and almost all its major allies.
Peace
-
Peace,
Yes, but cloning has nothing to do with this. Cloning is copying the DNA, and Jesus didn't look like Mary
-
Peace
Cloning destroys/annihilates your conjectural interpretation of 4913 and 5345-46. Also an XY male can be cloned from an XY female after repair of the mutation of SRY gene by genetic engineering.
-
Peace,
No it doesn't Tanveer, as the original DNA that is copied is always built up from a male and female. So even the genetically altered DNA you now mention is originally built up from a mixture of the two sexes. Don't be so quick with your 'destroy/annihilate'....In a few weeks inshAllah I will post something on what I believe are the Laws of Allah, then we can discuss it further.
-
Peace,
No it doesn't Tanveer, as the original DNA that is copied is always built up from a male and female. So even the genetically altered DNA you now mention is originally built up from a mixture of the two sexes. Don't be so quick with your 'destroy/annihilate'....In a few weeks inshAllah I will post something on what I believe are the Laws of Allah, then we can discuss it further.
You really need to be careful with what you state as factual/absolute statements. What about the FIRST DNA ? Even if both male and female DNA were originally simultaneously created, they could not themselves have arisen from a mixture of male and female DNA otherwise they won't be the first ever DNA. As usual, your "factual" statements seem to be based on your personal conjectures rather than actual facts. Just like when you take general statements like 4913 and 5345-46 and turn them into all-inclusive statements with no exceptions, even though "kullu" is nowhere to be found in them, and you take a specific never changing sunnat/way of God and turn it into all-inclusive laws of nature which is COMPLETELY unsupported by the context of the relevant verses and then base your "interpretations" on these kind of conjectures/inventions, it seriously affects your credibility.
Also what you might consider "natural laws" at this point in space and time may not be the actual absolute laws, which has been demonstrated in the past when Newtonian laws were shown to be inaccurate by the theory of relativity and quantum physics.
No offense, but I do have to be a bit critical when I see manipulations of words of God like that in the name of "interpretations" and stating of so called "facts" which are not based on the actual scientific facts, especially in an open forum where general readers can be mislead and deceived by such tactics.
Peace
-
Peace,
The first DNA of humans was also a mix of male and female, as it evolved out of lesser forms. As for 'kullu', indeed it is an important point I forgot. As for what we know about Laws. Newton wasn't wrong, his findings couldn't explain everything, what he discovered was mostly right. Same holds for Einstein. The Laws hasn't changed, we only know more and more backgrounds.
As for 'manipulations' and 'interpretations'. You defend the virgin-birth only based on an interpretation of a couple verses that have a wide wide interpretation-level. To believe in these interpretations you have to ignore a lot of logic and reason and hold on to many loose straws and just keep repeating 'Allah can do everything'. Yes He can. But is this also His tactic? I will refrain from this discussion now as we have discussed everything we can. I hope in a couple of weeks to post a new article which we can discuss then further. You are defending a miracle-belief that in my eyes goes against the Quran's message that tells us no one will believe through miracles. This is a left-over belief from the ancient people who ididn't understood the fixed and coherent workings of nature and thus believed anything could be done. This mythological psychology is what keeps holding back the Muslims and is the greatest 'mahjoor' on the Quran. You try to twist things as if you're defending the Truth, while your interpretation has many holes in them as I and others have shown. You don't defend the Truth, you defend your interpretation. Time will tell if it is the Truth or not.
-
And because you hardly understand Al-Quran, then Al-Quran is definitely a useless piece of horse manure, right? No one seems to have any objection.
I didn't say "if I DON'T..." I said "If I CAN'T".
Yes, and everyone CAN'T understand Al-Quran.(1746)
If the quran is impossible to understand, then it is useless.
Al-Quran is indeed impossible to understand for those who don't believe in the hereafter(1746). And you don't believe in the hereafter because it would be blind belief(according to you), right? So it is useless for you. And from now on, you will regard Al-Quran as horse s***, right? Or you already do?
There is no way around that fact, dude. Any book is only good if we can understand it.
Yes, there really is no way around it now. Everyone cannot understand Al-Quran(1746). So, in a forum that has been created for the study and understanding of Al-Quran, you will regard it as useless horse s***. Right?
-
As for 'manipulations' and 'interpretations'. You defend the virgin-birth only based on an interpretation of a couple verses that have a wide wide interpretation-level.
Remember, you haven't yet been able to show a single logical interpretation of that "wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiide wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiide interpretation-level" story of Marium receiving the good news from the malaika.
-
Peace Tanveer, I would like to inform you of some contradictory statement you made in your post of ?Reply #83 on December 22, 2006, 050343 AM?. I hope you will take these criticisms in a positive manner.
- You said ?My intention and aim in this thread was ? ?
Your intention, any special engagement rules for conducting the debate, arbitration rules, special conditions, etc. should be in the first post and not the end post
- You said ?We should heed the message of 37 and try to focus primarily on the muhkamat verses of al-qur'aan.?
Yet you are the one who started (continued) this thread on non-muhkamat verse. Why didn?t you heed to 37 prior to start of the debate
- You said ?We should not endlessly engage in debating/discussing/trying to figure out the true meanings of the mutashabihat verses .. ...?
Since you are the originator of the post it becomes your responsibility to end the debate properly. The way you came across is like you had enough of it and therefore you are stopping it or that you are not going to devote any more time to it. I think you are misusing the verse 37 to end the debate prematurely. That not right.
-
Remember, you haven't yet been able to show a single logical interpretation of that "wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiide wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiide interpretation-level" story of Marium receiving the good news from the malaika.
Stop playing the fool. Please, go read all of our discussions again. We go around in circles. If you disagree, fine. But don't try to act as if I haven't answered anything, this is a weak tactic.
Peace
-
Peace phoenix1, you said ?Any book is only good if we can understand it.?
If we apply your rationale to a person who does not understand say for example mathematics then to him the mathematics is garble. But lack of his understanding does not make the mathematic subject null and void. Similar example applies to fuzzy logic and other subjects.
I assumed that you are not all knowing. Therefore, anything you don't understand must be nonsense is simply wrong.
-
Peace Arnold Yasin, you said ?Newton wasn't wrong, his findings couldn't explain everything, what he discovered was mostly right.?
Newton equated space to a void. That?s wrong (he could not explain space).
I said 'mostly' yes did I not? His laws on energy movement for large bodies of mass are still correct. The things that they were uncertain of, like Newton was uncertain of what is space, were eloborated by later generations. Facts are the things that have been constantly been observed as being unchanging laws. That we misunderstand those ideas and Laws is normal as indeed our knowledge is limited to our current observations. The main point is that Tanveer tried to dismiss science in total as constant facts but as something that cannot be trusted. This is an overexggerated statement just to make his interpretation less unreasonable.
-
Remember, you haven't yet been able to show a single logical interpretation of that "wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiide wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiide interpretation-level" story of Marium receiving the good news from the malaika.
Stop playing the fool. Please, go read all of our discussions again. We go around in circles. If you disagree, fine.
We were hardly going around in circles. Maybe you should go and read it again. You provided an insanely illogical explanation of 'Marium's reaction to the good news'. When I replied to it and showed how illogical your explanation is, you ignored it and said "I believe we must agree to disagree Fahad."
It is harder, and impossible, for you to provide a logical explanation(other than virginbirth) of Marium's reaction. It is easier to 'agree to disagree'.
Going around circles, huh?!
But don't try to act as if I haven't answered anything,
I am not acting. You really haven't. If it has such a wiiiiiiiiiide range of interpretations, at least show us a few interpretations from it. A few that make sense.
...this is a weak tactic.
No . Weak tactic is this
You try to twist things as if you're defending the Truth, while your interpretation has many holes in them as I and others have shown. You don't defend the Truth, you defend your interpretation.
We try to twist things?! No, we are presenting it as it is. You try to twist it, and rationalize it to make it look more "scientific". You defend your interpretations and cover the holes in them with your Bibles and your science.
Just show another interpretation out of that wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii(yawwwn)iiiiiiiiiiiide range of interpretations, so everyone can see who is working so hard to twist the truth and to defend his interpretations.
Time will tell if it is the Truth or not.
Only the rejectors have to wait and see (4153). The believers already know that it is the truth. (226)
-
Only the rejectors have to wait and see (4153). The believers already know that it is the truth. (226)
Exactly
-
Yes, and everyone CAN'T understand Al-Quran.(1746)
OK, then it is useless. That's just common sense, isn't it?
Al-Quran is indeed impossible to understand for those who don't believe in the hereafter(1746). And you don't believe in the hereafter because it would be blind belief(according to you), right? So it is useless for you. And from now on, you will regard Al-Quran as horse s***, right? Or you already do?
wait...is it impossible to understand for everyone? or just people like me?
so to understand the quran, we need to first believe that it is from god and that if we don't believe it we will spend eternity in hell?Yes, there really is no way around it now. Everyone cannot understand Al-Quran(1746). So, in a forum that has been created for the study and understanding of Al-Quran, you will regard it as useless horse s***. Right?
why the heck do we even have a forum for understanding the quran if we cannot understand it!!?
why do you even read the quran if you cannot understand it?
See, I read books in english because that is a language I understand. I do not read books in latin because I do not understand latin. Even if I could read it, I would not understand what it is saying, so it would be useless. -
Peace Arnold,
The first DNA of humans was also a mix of male and female, as it evolved out of lesser forms.
You are again doing the same thing as before and stating your own personal opinion/conjecture/theory as a scientific fact, but that is hardly surprising and has become very predictable and seriously damages your credibility...... so keep these kind of statements coming
The "missing link" has never been discovered so what you are saying is not a fact but merely a conjecture. What about the first DNA ever ? Did it also originate from a male and a female ? or from a "sperm" as you conjecture per your fallacious and scientifically incorrect twisted interpretation of "nutfatin" in 5346 ?
As for 'kullu', indeed it is an important point I forgot.
Thank you for admitting at least one of your errors. It takes courage to admit one's mistake and that improves your credibility somewhat. At least we are making some progress !!
As for what we know about Laws. Newton wasn't wrong, his findings couldn't explain everything, what he discovered was mostly right. Same holds for Einstein. The Laws hasn't changed, we only know more and more backgrounds.
Saying Newton wasn't wrong and then saying he was mostly right are contradictory statements. Even if he was wrong in one thing he was wrong about that thing. You should have said he wasn't completely wrong rather than saying he wasn't wrong.
No one can completely understand some of God's laws because there is always a changing and progressive human understanding of those laws. Maybe the "miracles" occurred through an as yet unknown or undiscovered law or we haven't understood the relevant laws completely yet. To dismiss them completely/absolutely as impossible would show the same kind of ignorance as shown by someone 500 years ago dismissing all the technology and phenomenon discovered in the last 100 years just because that person couldn't understand the relevant laws at that time.
You defend the virgin-birth only based on an interpretation of a couple verses that have a wide wide interpretation-level. To believe in these interpretations you have to ignore a lot of logic and reason and hold on to many loose straws and just keep repeating 'Allah can do everything'. Yes He can.
You are the one who ignores logic and reason when you make a conjectural twisted interpretation of what Mary said in reaction to the good news, which completely ignores the grammar of the language and the context and based on other fallacious and illogical understandings of other pertinent verses, one of which you just admitted as above, and on historical hearsay and conjectures of the cultural rules of the sanctuary in those days.
You are defending a miracle-belief that in my eyes goes against the Quran's message that tells us no one will believe through miracles.
Again you are inventing a lie against God. Where does God say that NO ONE will believe through miracles ? A while back in one of your initial posts on this thread (http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=13174.msg109550#msg109550) you tried to justify your personal theories/opinions and your personal desires by mistranslating a verse
6111 Even if We caused the angels to descend to them, and the dead to speak to them, and We lined up all the miracles before them, they would not believe. People can be guided only according to Allah?s Laws, but most of them choose the way of ignorance.
Where does it say in the original arabic of the verse what you mistranslated in the underlined portion ?
Arnold, fear God. You have gone to the extreme of mistranslating God's verses for your own personal desires. This is not an interpretation but a DELIBERATE MISTRANSLATION/WRONG TRANSLATION. You should translate the verse accurately and then give your own conjectural interpretation separately but NOT IN THE VERSE ITSELF.
Following is the literal translation of 6111
6111 And if that We descended to them the angels, and the deads talked (to) them , and We gathered on them every thing in front, they were not to believe, except that God wants/wills, and but most of them are being ignorant.
"Except that God wants/wills" shows that some of them MIGHT BELIEVE.
To start with, this verse talks about those who set up partners and not all mankind. To say that this verse shows that NO ONE will believe in miracles is not an interpretation but inventing a lie against God.
Peace
-
PARTHENOGENESIS IS NOT "VIRGIN BIRTH"
From what I understand, "Pathenogenesis" is more like a replication that is suited for lower forms of life... just the way cells divide.
Among other traits reptiles have (including regrowth of limbs and extremely fast regeneration of tissue - not observed in mammals) these creatures, though a lot more complex than insects, do not have higher brain functions.
For lizards such as Komodo dragons, the brain lobes are mostly limited to the limbic system
- They control very calculated and extremely limited emotional characteristics, which can be replicated indefinitely without eventually going sterile.
- And since they are very well-adapted for their environment, they may not evolve (consider that they, like other reptiles, have been around in these forms longer than mammals even existed.) Hence, their replication is an indication that they may have reached a termal/stagnated level of their evolution unless a mutation occurs.
For parthenogenesis of humans, it is proposed that this cannot be induced naturally Why?
-
If it did, the DNA will become stagnated.
-
Also, if parthenogenesis occurs in mammals, then it is unlikely to stop in one generation It will keep on occuring since it is a REPLICATION (an exact copy of the DNA.) The same DNA will keep on replicating its copy/imprint.
-
All demi-humans who shall be born out of parthenogenesis will be FEMALE. Please study genetics before you claim scientific explanations for "virgin birth" in humans...
This is a catch 22 for human pathenogens... Unless you want to claim that Jesus was a woman, please stop asserting parthenogenesis as a means of his birth!
-
wait...so Jesus is a dude??!!?!?!
and maxq, even if that was possible, what Tanveer is claiming cannot have occured without some form of supernatural. Parthenogenesis was just another attempt to make virgin birth look scientific (when it clearly isn't).So what it all comes down to is whether you believe in supernatural or not. I don't, so it is impossible for me to accept virgin birth. Tanveer and others do, so it works for them. What I don't like is trying to explain something supernatural scientifically. I've been seeing this with jinn (plasma beings and what not) and now the same thing's going on with virgin birth.