Anonymous wrote:No one, including Hippocrates, the Greeks, Chinese, Romans knew that only one of the spermatozoa from the millions present in a ‘drop’ of semen is required for fertilization. In other words, the ‘sulala’ or the extract of the sperm-drop is required for the creation of man.

Is this not compelling evidence that the Quran knew what no one else knew at that time?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But the only reason to discuss Cesarean section would be to prove that people knew about fetal development before the Quran did. There's no mention that Romans, Greeks, Chinese, etc.. knew about the stages of fetal development or anything else about fetal development. It only states c-sections were used to save the child when it was determined the mother was dying.

No, in the context you brought up it is important to note C-sections existed because by cutting up the stomach of a pregnant woman, it would be noticed that the fetus is wrapped in several protective layers, which the Quran mentioned. It's not about fetal development.

The Quran itself did not explain what it meant by THREE STAGES, VEILED IN DARKNESS. Some criticizers might interpret that verse to refer to the different layers of protection the fetus had. However, since that verse clearly spoke of stages, not layers, it might actually be referring to the three stages of pregnancy (1st, 2nd, 3rd trimester).
And even if the Quranic verse was referring to the three layers of the protection the fetus had and not the stages of fetal development, wouldn't the Greeks, Romans, Chinese, and all the other groups you mentioned have written about them, illustrated them somewhere? Where is it?

I think you said it best that the Quran did not explain what it meant by three stages, nor has it illustrated it. We simply do not know what it meant, and it can be interpreted any way one wishes. The trimester sequencing of pregnancy is entirely arbitrary. It could have been nine or four and a half, or one. That medicine decided to divide it by three is a random thing.

I have cited for you Gallenic experiments on pregnant dogs; presumably, it is written somewhere. I'm sure other people have created written records on what they thought happens inside pregnant bellies. You don't know that they haven't written about it. What is clearly known is that people have seen the inside of pregnant bellies with fetuses inside.

Hippocratic not Gallenic.

Anonymous wrote:

We are discussing the embryology as explained in the Quran, not Arab scientific thought. The Quran revelations of
1)three stages of pregnancy 2) reference to what we now identify as spermatozoa, and 3) leech like clot seem to be compelling because Galen, Hippocrates, the Chinese, Romans did not make mention of these. The Qurans revelations may not have influenced Arab scientific contribution and thus, Arab may not have made contributions to embryology, but why confuse that with the Quran. Apples to boxcars.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the idea that humans were made from a mix of male and female reproductive fluids came as early as Hippocrates.

Professor Keith Moore does translate "nutfah" in the Quran, Sura 76:2 as "mingled fluid" and explains that this Arabic term refers to the male and female fluids which contain the gametes. This can reasonably be translated semen or germinal fluid, which was a term used as early as Hippocrates since he did speak of male and female reproductive fluids. So this is not compelling proof. But nutfah does not have only one meaning in Arabic. It can also mean "a very small quantity of liquid. " Hippocrates did not know the reproductive fluid used to create life was but a very small quantity necessary. And if you read the Quran verse 32:8, it states, "And we created his progeny from the extract of a lowly fluid." This verse contains the word, "sulala," which translated here as ‘extract’ is used in Arabic to refer to ‘a part of something, the issue of something else’. So the Quran is saying that only an extract or part of that very small quantity of semen fluid is required for the creation of a human being. No one, including Hippocrates, the Greeks, Chinese, Romans knew that only one of the spermatozoa from the millions present in a ‘drop’ of semen is required for fertilization. In other words, the ‘sulala’ or the extract of the sperm-drop is required for the creation of man.

Is this not compelling evidence that the Quran knew what no one else knew at that time?

No, not to me. The standard volume of ejaculation is one table spoon. That may feel like a lot, but in actuality it is a very small volume of liquid. That is observable with a naked eye. It is also observable with a naked eye that one doesn't need the entire volume of ejaculate to create a pregnancy since during a normal intercourse some of it leaks out.

Anonymous wrote:It's also important to note that Dr. Moore's opinion is but one voice. For instance, a hugely influential work of Joseph Needham "A History of Embryology" devotes over fifty pages to the works of Galen, Aristotle, Hippocrates and other Greeks, but dispenses with the Arab achievements in this area in under one page, opining that the Arab scientific thought, though it contributed so much to optics and astronomy, did not contribute much to embryology. [/quote

We are discussing the embryology as explained in the Quran, not Arab scientific thought. The Quran revelations of
1)three stages of pregnancy 2) reference to what we now identify as spermatozoa, and 3) leech like clot seem to be compelling because Galen, Hippocrates, the Chinese, Romans did not make mention of these. The Qurans revelations may not have influenced Arab scientific contribution and thus, Arab may not have made contributions to embryology, but why confuse that with the Quran. Apples to boxcars.