2,743
edits
[checked revision] | [checked revision] |
Lightyears (talk | contribs) |
Lightyears (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
===Debating Technique=== | ===Debating Technique=== | ||
Proponents of Qur'anic embryology often defend their position by claiming that words like ' | Proponents of Qur'anic embryology often defend their position by claiming that words like 'alaqah can have several meanings, and that some or all of these meanings apply at the same time. Thus, we hear that the 'alaqah is a leech, or looks like a leech if viewed in a certain angle, or is a leech-like thing, is a clot of blood, or looks like a blood clot, or hangs from or clings to the endometrium. Some of these are genuine definitions of 'alaqah, others are not. Every one is problematic and will be addressed below. | ||
The best method of refuting Qur'anic embryology is by questioning every claim as to its validity, and to make its proponents justify every claim. This would include why they chose to make a choice when there are several other equally valid possibilities, why they chose to ignore clearly nonsensical phrases, and why they assume certain phrases to be metaphorical while others to be literal. Some will also benefit from seeing the definitions of the significant words from Lane's Lexicon of classical arabic, cited and linked throughout this article. | The best method of refuting Qur'anic embryology is by questioning every claim as to its validity, and to make its proponents justify every claim. This would include why they chose to make a choice when there are several other equally valid possibilities, why they chose to ignore clearly nonsensical phrases, and why they assume certain phrases to be metaphorical while others to be literal. Some will also benefit from seeing the definitions of the significant words from Lane's Lexicon of classical arabic, cited and linked throughout this article. | ||
If, the reader is so inclined, they can read a good summary of the arbitrary assumptions and heavily selective debating technique used by apologists, with a particular focus on Keith Moore's claims,[{{Reference archive|1=http://web.archive.org/web/20060214032231/http://www.geocities.com/freethoughtmecca/embryo.html|2=2011-12-05}} here], and can read the relevant sections [http://embryologyinthequran.blogspot.com here] to see how many of the word definitions used in Islamic apologetics are based on misquotes of Arabic dictionaries and are incompatible with how those same Arabic words were used in the hadith (such as the claims that the word 'alaqah meant a "leech-like substance", that a mudghah is not merely a small piece of meat, but one that has been chewed). | If, the reader is so inclined, they can read a good summary of the arbitrary assumptions and heavily selective debating technique used by apologists, with a particular focus on Keith Moore's claims,[{{Reference archive|1=http://web.archive.org/web/20060214032231/http://www.geocities.com/freethoughtmecca/embryo.html|2=2011-12-05}} here], and can read the relevant sections [http://embryologyinthequran.blogspot.com here] to see how many of the word definitions used in Islamic apologetics are based on misquotes of Arabic dictionaries and are incompatible with how those same Arabic words were used in the hadith (such as the claims that the word 'alaqah meant a "leech-like substance", that a mudghah is not merely a small piece of meat, but one that has been chewed). | ||
===Original Creation from Dust / Clay / Mud=== | ===Original Creation from Dust / Clay / Mud=== |