REF: virgin birth, what about Cloning ?
-
peace
We should heed the message of 37 and try to focus primarily on the muhkamat verses of al-qur'aan. We should try to understand AND implement the basic core message of al-qur'aan which is to believe in God and the Last Day and to be righteous. We should not endlessly engage in debating/discussing/trying to figure out the true meanings of the mutashabihat verses, keeping in mind that only God knows the true meaning of those verses. 37 is proof that understanding the mutashabihat verses of al-qur'aan is not required/necessary for our guidance because we might never be able to figure out their true meaning.
BS.
Why did God include all those verses if we can't understand them? and how do we know which ones are understandable and which ones aren't? 37 honestly makes NO sense.
If 37 is talking about the quran, then Ayman explained it saying that it is talking about the "original" meaning of the verses, which only God can know, but we can get lessons from it and follow it, but we can't claim to know what God actually means.
If 37 is not talking about the quran, but the universe, then it would make more sense. There are clear signs in this universe, and there are not so clear signs. And we can't understand truly what is behind those signs. We might think something is bad when really it is good or something like that. And the perverse will use those unclear signs to spread evil.
If it doesn't mean any of the above, then it is complete and utter bullshit. Sorry for being so blunt. But that's just what I think. No offence is intended, and I respect everyone else's opinions.
peace -
salam all this is my first post, but I'd like to comment on this
5345-46
And He is the One who created the pair, male and female. From a seed(nutfatin) that is put forth.
I my opinion it seems it refer to the origin of the male and female not just creating male and female. And this is plausable because male and female came from mirco-organisms(nutfatin).When the quran refers to creating male and female humans from a womb
762
We have created the human from a seed that is mixed, We test him, so We made him hear and see.It says from a nutfatin that is mixed, clearly a reference to the egg and sperm joining, not just the sperm.
7537-39
Was he not a seed from sperm put forth? Then he was a clot, so he was created and developed. Then He made the two pairs, male and female.This is refering to when the fetus is designated as male or female. Notice that in 7537 while describing the nutfatin(small drop) in that particular verse it uses the word manayyin-literally meaning sperm-which is put forth, so implying that not all nutfatins are sperm. And Muhammed Asad puts it as "Was he not once a drop of sperm that had been spilt," he translated nutfatin as drop-not sperm, but manayyin as sperm.
So by saying that nutfatin means sperm is incorrect. Hence cloning and parthenogenesis do not contradict this verse.
These are just my thoughts, but I think it seems that verse 5345-46 is refering to the origin of the male and female.
-
Salam.
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.Peace.
-
if God created "all", why wouldn't he be able to make Virgin Mary pregnant? you believe it, or you don't. God is almighty as fare as I know. I think God will enjoy more to create a human than create an earthquake....and I believe God knows more about cloning than any of us bravo
sun
-
Peace,
Of course Allah can do it, this is not the discussion. It is about what falls under Allah's Laws as he clearly says He will not brake His Laws. These include the Laws of the Universe.
-
Peace all,
He clearly says He will not brake His Laws. These include the Laws of the Universe
The part of Arnold's quote in blue is indeed supported by al-qur'aan but the part of his quote in red is a CLEAR fabrication/invention/assumption/lie which is unsupported by al-qur'aan and akin to inventing a lie against God. If not then please provide evidences supporting the red statement from al-qur'aan. For new readers, my first post in this thread includes qur'aanic evidence of what I just stated. The ONLY law/way/sunnat of God that He promised never to change as per al-qur'aan, is giving evil some respite and then utterly destroying it eventually. We cannot assume from this that ALL laws of universe are included in that never changing sunnat of God.
-
Salam all.
If I cannot understand the quran, then the quran is a useless piece of horse manure.
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.
(just my thoughts
Just your farts.
If it(37) doesn't mean any of the above, then it is complete and utter bulls***.
-
Salam Aleikum,
Dear Tanveer, when I have the time, I will come with my proof of why I believe it is such as I'm at the moment very busy. If you will disagree with my interpretation, that is fine as this is the right of every Muslim. But to call soemthing a lie is a big assumption until the proof is given. I suggest you should not speak in such harsh terms as you have only authority on your interpretation.
-
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". If the quran is impossible to understand, then it is useless. There is no way around that fact, dude. Any book is only good if we can understand it.
peace! peace
-
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