Yes but all the religions are interpretations of the message God gave to the messenger.
No, they are not. Korresh said that he personally was God. He did not interprete anything.
Whose ours or those who oppose islam.
The general consensus of moderan literature as far as I can tell. Encylopedias, Wikipidia, etc.
read your post it is giving the analogy of siblings when angel have none.
So angels have no peers who were made by the same creator and have similar stature (such as other angels)?
Please prove your claim that Gabriel was told directly by Allah and not by another angel.
No, The angel Gabriel is a perfect servant of Allah. When Allah commands them they do it with no hesitation. The Angel Gabriel was the one who gave the message of Allah to all the prophets not just Muhammed. The spirit that came and descended upon Mary as the bible says is Gabriel. He came to her with the news she would deliver a son. When the angels came to Lot and his people at Sodom it was Gabriel. when David recieved the Zaboor it was Gabriel that brought it to him.
Where in the Quran does it say that Allah told Gabriel directly and not through another angel?
Again what does that have to do with the zygote. Is the Umbilicus, placenta, and uterine lining a blood clot. No. And You can refer me to some additional books i have. but it does not dispute the fact that many doctors support this. I am no doctor and am not going to criticize their expertese in the subject. But if they say it is that is sufficient for me. Why they have the documentation to back up what they say.
No. There are no medical doctors that will tell you that a zygote is a type of blood clot. You are either misunderstanding, misremembering, or lying.
There's no confusion, contention, nor uncertainty regarding what a blood clot is (connected platelets), what a zygote is (a collection of fetal stem-cells), nor that the two are not the same.
Life does not begin as a blood clot. The statement that it does, as made in the quran, is demonstably false. Whomever authored that statement was ignorant of actual biology. Can Allah be ignorant as to how life begins? If not, then Allah cannot have autored that statement.
I was referring to before the Quran came. before muhammed was the messenger what was his people understanding of the world the female anatomy and so on. You claim he knew these things before so I asked you to give me the evidence.
No, I claim that the knowledge (false knowledge in the case of blood clots) was readiliy accessable in the region at the time. The fact that he knew it at the time of his claiming it is evidenced by the fact that he claimed it.
The only thing in dispute is the source of his (wrong) knowledge.
1. He was told by an angel who did not correctly relate how life begins.
2. He learned it from other people who had wrong information.
Either way, your argument is SOL. You either have a statement not from God, or a God who failed biology 101.
I have not seen any evidence yet. If you have listed it already i did not get it. So if you would not mind I would like to see how it fits all available evidence.
1. Miscarriages contain a lot of blood.
2. Anyone with any intelligence can conclude that, since a misarriage ends a pregnancy, and since a pregnancy is a baby forming, that the miscarriage contains the early baby.
3. It's therefore completely consistant with those facts (evidence) for someone to conclude that a zygot is a blood clot. It's also categorically incorrect.
That would be the evidece I am fitting (1 and 2 above).
Allah does not state life begins as a blood clot. Who is this person you claim. Life in the initial stages of the human as it develops is described as this.
The Quran: 23:12-14.
That is your job. I tell you he hasn't you say he has give me an evidence.
Google "burden of proof". I've stated that the knowledge was readily available. If, for example, you were to write a book now and claim that the Earth was round... then 1500 years from now someone said "He didn't know the Earth was round until God told him, and the Earth is round, therefore we know it was God", it would be correct to challenge that claim under the fact that the Earth bing round is common knowledge in this time and place.
That Muhammed would definately not have known something which was common knowledge is an extrodinary claim and, as such, carries a burden of proof.
Many scholars who are non muslim will tell you this. Alexander came how many years before Muhammed. So Alexander is the reason they all became pagans. Where is his influence exactly. Was it the language or the great architecture. Do you even know what Arabia was at the time of the messenger.
You've argued that they would not have had access to the knowlege of the Greeks, despite Aribia having been the seat of Greek power. Please support your claim that all of this knowldge disappeared.
Also, where do you think the Arabs got all the Greek knowledge in the 1200s? We know they had it, because they taught it to the Europeans... and we know it was greek because it was not simply facts but the specific treachings of such people as Socrates and Plato.
But did they have that at that time.
There was no one interacting with them at the time with that knowlede. This is not the case for the Arabs who had been the seat of Greek power and who were actively trading with Egypt, India, and Europe.
I never said he did not meet with others. I said he did not know any of these concepts Again he was a merchant at the time. Not a student of knowledge and it costs money to go and sit and learn. In those times it was different. People who seeked knowlegdge and traveled alot had alot of money. The arabs were only concerned with what their ancestors did. They were a tribal society. They did not care what you do only what their fathers did.
Common knowledge is common knowledge. If you wish to assert that the Arabs at the tim were fundamentally different from any people ever recorded anywhere, then I invite you to prove this claim.
Your argument rests on not simply claims about Muhammed, but extraordinary claims that he was so blindingly ignorant as to have never had a basic conversation with anyone with 5 functioning senses. Please support this claim as it's rediculious.
What do you mean. He knew it after the ayat came. What are you talking about.
You said "He knew after Allah delivered it to him". So you admit that Muhammed displayed the knowledge. Your contention that I need to prove he knew this is moot as you agree he knewit.
What you claim is what the source of his knowledge was. This is a positive claim and carries a burden of proof. Please prove your claim. So far your proofs have relied on him not knowing from any available source. As this is exclusionary, it also carries a burden of proof (that is to say: It's a positive claim ("allah told him"))
Yes but if they could not read or write or they themselves were busy with trying to survive in a very harsh environment. Look at people who spend their lives tilling the fields are they great scholars. They have no time. It is constant work for them.
The people I know in the fields have access to common knowledge. Firther, Muhammed was a merchant, not a farmer. The people I know who are merchants have access to a lot of knowledge as it's part of their livelyhood.
But you've admitted he knew. The question is how. You have a positive assertion in that regard.
Social within the arabs. How many times was he invited to come stay at a roman or persians house where they would teach him. Who from amongst the arab was ever invited to do this.
So within the Roman empire, only people from the city of Rome would have heard any common knowledge of the Empire? Please prove such an extraordinary claim.
My evidence that a zygote isn't a blood-clot? Pretty much any book on anatomy or biology. It's pretty basic knowledge (when an egg and a sperm meet, the fertilized egg becomes a fetal stem cell which begins dividing). Would you like me to point you att some reasources on neo-natal development?
What's my evidence that an infallable and all-knowing critter would not falsely know something? It's in the definition. If Allah though something that was wrong (that a baby was a blood clot) then he would be wrong... hence fallable (having demonstrated the fallacy of false knoweledge).
Did you seriously not understand such a basic tautology?
The term is arabic is described as a sensitive drop of blood or the translation in my Quran says Thick coagulated blood. This is what is it. And if it is not then what is it then.
So you tell me what it is then.
A clump of fetal stem cells. Stem cells are not a type of blood cell and are not normally found in large quantites in the blood (in adults they are generally confined to bone marrow). I've seen my own stem cells. Have you?
