تويت
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
نقرا من سفر ايوب الاصحاح العاشر
9 اُذْكُرْ أَنَّكَ جَبَلْتَنِي كَالطِّينِ، أَفَتُعِيدُنِي إِلَى التُّرَابِ؟
10 أَلَمْ تَصُبَّنِي كَاللَّبَنِ، وَخَثَّرْتَنِي كَالْجُبْنِ؟
11 كَسَوْتَنِي جِلْدًا وَلَحْمًا، فَنَسَجْتَنِي بِعِظَامٍ وَعَصَبٍ.
اعتقدت شعوب منطقة الشرق الاوسط و خاصة الهلال الخصيب ان الجنين يتكون في رحم امه نتيجة تخثر مني الرجل اذا خالط دم المراة (حيضها) و ان هذا هو السبب الرئيسي لعدم حيض المراة طوال فترة حملها و هذا ما يشير اليه نص العدد العاشر اعلاه حيث يشبه ماء الرجل باللبن و تخثره كتخثر الجبن !!!.
و هذا الاعتقاد لمراجل تكون الجنين كان سائدا لدى الشعوب القديمة - كما اسلفنا - من القرن الثالث و الرابع قبل الميلاد و حتى القرن السابع عشر و الثامن عشر وممن اشاروا الى هذه النظرية بوجه او باخر: ابقراط و ارسطو و جالينوس .
نقرا من كتاب Text Book Of Embryology الصفحة 2:
(( Before the 17th century embryological knowledge was based on the writings of Aristotle and Galen. Embryology as a branch of biology was initiated by the famous Greek philosopher Aristotle He was the first embryologist to describe the development and reproduction of many kinds of organisms in his book entitled "Degeneration Animalium". He believed firmly that the complex adult organism develops from a simple formless beginning.Thus he laid the foundation for the basic principles of epigenesist a theory postulated after 2000 years later. For this Aristotle is honored as the father of embryology. Aristotle has written that the male contributes the semen and the female contributes the contamenia....... He had no knowledge of ovary. He thought that the female reproductive system is formed of uterus only and not of anything else. The cantamenia represents the material foundation of the embryo. The development is activated and guided by the semen. The semen contributes nothing material to the embryo ))
نقرا مقال من The Embryo Project Encyclopedia تاليف : Dorothy Regan Haskett, Valerie Racine, Joanna Yang
((Throughout his works, Aristotle expounded an empirical form of scientific investigation of the natural world and contributed to the field of embryology. His embryological work remained relevant for centuries, and during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, when new technologies became available for scientists to observe developmental processes,Aristotle's theories resulted in controversies. Early microscopic observers reported what they claimed were miniature humans in either sperm or egg cells. In the late seventeenth century, the theory of preformation became popular among natural philosophers. The theory held that an embryo is a miniature version of an adult organism, and that the adult emerges as the embryo gets bigger. By the eighteenth century, preformation became the dominant theory of embryonic development, gaining proponents who dismissed Aristotle's theory of epigenesis.))
https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/aristotle-384-322-bce
وهذا التشابه راجع كما قلنا الى ان كاتب سفر ايوب تاثر بالجو الثقافي الذي كان سائدا حينما الف السفر .
نقرا من التفسير الحديث للكتاب المقدس لسفر ايوب الصفحة 20 - 21 :
(( ان كتابا كسفر ايوب لم يكتب من فراغ فالله وحده هو الذي يخلق من العدم و مخلوقاته تستخدم المواد التي اعطاها لهم و العقل يؤدي وظيفته من واقع التجربة الانسانية و من حصيلة الثقفاة البشرية. فاذا كان المرء حصل على قدر واف من التعليم فانه يزود بافكار الاخرين . و كاتب سفر ايوب لم يكن حساسا وذكيا فقط بل كان ذي تجربة و مثقفا و يمكن ايضا ان نستشف من السفر المجتمع الذي كان يغذي فكره. اننا لا نعرف مقدار ما حصل عليه من تعليم من قراءة السفر او من مناقشة انواع الصور البلاغية في كتابه او من رحلاته . و لا نعرف ان كان يستطيع قراءة لغات اخرى خلاف اللغة العبرية لنعرف ان كان اقتبس مباشرة من ادب الدول المجاورة .
و لكن مهما يكن الباعث فان فنه فريد في بابه و لكن ليس منعزلا . ففي المقام الاول فانه متفق مع تقاليد شعبه ، انه اسرائيلي في الجوهر و العقيدة و في نفس الوقت عالمي في انسانيته، فهو عينه من نوع الادب السائد في العالم القديم و الذي كان ادبا عالميا في طبيعته ذلك الادب الذي يسمى على نطاق واسع ادب " الحكمة" ))
و نقرا من نفس المصدر الصفحة 165 :
(( اذا كانت بعض صيحات ايوب الثائرة قد جعلتنا نخشى انه في خطر الانزلاق الى عدم الايمان فهذه القصيدة الجميلة عن الخليقة توضح ان ايوب مؤمن تماما بمقاصد الله الحسنة (انظر التعليق على 10: 3) في خلقه للانسان . و هو يستخدم ثلاث او اربع صور جميلة مستمدة من التكنلوجيا ليحكي قصة بداءة الانسان، ..... واكثر الصور وضوحا تخشر الجسم كالجبن (10) و هي صورة فريدة في العهد القديم ))
نقرا في هامش الصفحة تعليقا على ما سبق :
(( (1) تحدث الكتاب المتاخرون بعد ذلك عن تجلط المني او الدم حتى يصبح جنينا ))
و نقرا من الترجمة الرهبانية اليسوعية الصفحة 1065 في الهامش تعليقا على ايوب 10: 10:
(( كان العلم الطبي القديم يتصور تكون الجنين كتجمد دم الام بتاثير عنصر الزرع ))
و نقرا من John Trapp Complete Commentary :
((And curdled me like cheese?] Sic castissimo ore, et elegantibus metaphoris, saith an interpreter; i.e. Thus, in a most modest manner, and with elegant metaphors, doth Job, as a great philosopher, set out man’s conception in the womb.Aristotle (whose manner is obscurioribus obscura implicare, as Bodin observeth) hath some such expression as this, but nothing so clear and full (Bodin. Theat. Natur., 434. Arist. de Gen. Anim. cap. 20 )
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jtc/job-10.html
و نقرا من George Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary:
((Milked. Hebrew, "poured me out as milk, and curdled me like cheese?" (Haydock) --- See Wisdom vii. 1. The ancients explained our origin by the comparison of milk curdled, or cheese; (Arist.[Aristotle?] i. 10.; Pliny, [Natural History?] vii. 15.) which the moderns have explained on more plausible principles. (Calmet) --- Yet still we may acknowledge our ignorance with the mother of Machabees, 2 Machabees vii. 22. ))https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/hcc/job-10.html
و هذا ما دفع المؤرخ جوزيف نيدهام في كتابه A History of Embryology بالتصريح بان النظرية التي تبناها الاقدمون عن مراحل تكون الجنين هي بالضبط ما اشار اليه سفر ايوب 10: 10
(( 'During the period when the biological school of Alexandria was at its height, that city became an important Jewish centre. Two centuries later It was to produce Philo, but now the Alexandrian Jews were writing that part of the modem Bible known as the Wisdom Literature. In books such as the Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus , Proverbs, etc. the typical Hellenic exclusion of gods in natural phenomena is clearly to be seen. There are two passages of embryological importance. Firstly, in the Book of Job (x. to), Job is made to say,Remember, I beseech thee, that thou hast fashioned me as clay; and wilt thou bring me into the dust again? Host thou not poured me out as milk, and curdled me like cheese? Thou hast clothed me with skin and flah, and knit me together with bones and sinews.
This comparison of embryology with the making of cheese is interesting in view of the fact that precisely the same comparison occurs in Aristotle’s book On the Generation of animals, as we have already seen.‘ Still more extraordinary, the only other embryological reference in the Wisdom Literature, which occurs in the Wisdom of Solomon (vii. 2), also copies an Aristotelian theory, namely, that the embryo is formed from (menstrual) blood))
و من كلام جوزيف نيدهام نرى ان الفكرة نفسها تتكرر في نص اخر من نصوص العهد القديم عند الارثذوكس و الكاثوليك
حيث نقرا في سفر الحكمة الاصحاح السابع :
2 وفي مدة عشرة اشهر صنعت من الدم بزرع الرجل واللذة التي تصاحب النوم .
بل نجد الفكرة نفسها ايضا موجودة في العهد الجديد !!!!
نقرا من انجيل يوحنا الاصحاح الاول :
13 اَلَّذِينَ وُلِدُوا لَيْسَ مِنْ دَمٍ، وَلاَ مِنْ مَشِيئَةِ جَسَدٍ، وَلاَ مِنْ مَشِيئَةِ رَجُل، بَلْ مِنَ اللهِ.
وقد استخدم ترتليان (قرن ثاني) هذا النص لتاكيد نفس الفكرة السابقة عن عملية التخثر التي تحصل عند التقاء ماء الرجل بدم المراة في رحمها
نقرا من كتاب ترتليان De Carne Christ الفصل 19 :
((19 'What then is the meaning of, Was born not of blood nor of thewill of the flesh nor of the will of a man, but of God?'1 This text will
be of more use to me than to them, when I have refuted those
who falsify it. For they maintain that it was thus written, Were
born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh or of a man, but of God,2 as
though it referred to the above-mentioned believers in his name:3
and from it they try to prove that there exists that mystic seed of
the elect and spiritual which they baptize for themselves. But
how can it mean this, when those who believe in the name of the
Lord are all of them by the common law of human kind born of
blood and of the will of the flesh and of a man, as also is Valentinus
himself? Consequently the singular is correct, as referring
to the Lord--was born . . . of God. Rightly so, because the Word is
God's, and with the Word is God's Spirit, and in the Spirit is
God's power, and God's everything that Christ is. As flesh,
however, he was not born of blood, nor of the will of the flesh
and of a man, because the Word was made flesh by the will of
God: for it is to his flesh, not to the Word, that this denial of a
nativity after our pattern applies; and the reason is that it was
the flesh, not the Word, which might have been expected to be
born that way. 'But in denying, among other things, that he was
born of the will of the flesh, surely it also denies that he was born
of the substance of flesh.' No: because neither does the denial that
he was born of blood involve any repudiation of the substance of
flesh, but of the material of the seed, which material it is agreed is
the heat of the blood, as it were by despumation changed into
a coagulator of the woman's blood. For from the coagulator there
is in cheese a function of that substance, namely milk, which by
chemical action it causes to solidify. We understand, then, a denial
that the Lord's nativity was the result of coition (which is the
meaning of the will of a man and of the flesh), but no denial that it
was by a partaking of the womb. And why indeed does the
evangelist with such amplification insist that the Lord was born
not of blood nor of the will of the flesh or of a man, except that
his flesh was such as no one would suspect was not born of coition? ))
http://www.tertullian.org/articles/e...carn_04eng.htm
ملاحظة :
حاول بعض المنصرين الرد على الانتقادات التي وجهت الى نص ايوب 10: 10 بالادعاء بان النص خالف المعتقد السائد لثقافة عصره اذ ان السائد انذاك - حسب كلامهم- كانت نظرية الانسان القزم و هي النظرية القائمة على ان ماء الرجل يحمل جنينا قزما بداخله حيث يستقر هذا الجنين في رحم المراة ثم يبدا بالتضخم شيئا فشيئا !!!!
و اقول ردا على هذا الكذب الفاضح :
1. ان نظرية الجنين القزم لم تكن سائدة الا في القرنين السابع عشر و الثامن عشر واما قبل ذلك و منذ القرنين الثالث و الرابع قبل الميلاد فقد كانت نظرية التخثر الناتج من ماء الرجل و دم المراة هي النظرية السائدة لدى شعوب المنطقة .
نقرا من كتاب Text Book Of Embryology الصفحة 2:
(( Before the 17th century embryological knowledge was based on the writings of Aristotle and Galen. Embryology as a branch of biology was initiated by the famous Greek philosopher Aristotle He was the first embryologist to describe the development and reproduction of many kinds of organisms in his book entitled "Degeneration Animalium". He believed firmly that the complex adult organism develops from a simple formless beginning.Thus he laid the foundation for the basic principles of epigenesist a theory postulated after 2000 years later. For this Aristotle is honored as the father of embryology. Aristotle has written that the male contributes the semen and the female contributes the contamenia....... He had no knowledge of ovary. He thought that the female reproductive system is formed of uterus only and not of anything else. The cantamenia represents the material foundation of the embryo. The development is activated and guided by the semen. The semen contributes nothing material to the embryo ))
2. القول بان ابقراط و ارسطو و جالينوس قالو بنظرية الجنين القزم هو عين الكذب !!
اذ ان ارسطو ذكر النظريتين الا انه رجح نظرية التخثر كما اسلفنا .
نقرا من الموسوعة البريطانية :
((Embryology, the study of the formation and development of an embryo and fetus. Before widespread use of the microscope and the advent of cellular biology in the 19th century, embryology was based on descriptive and comparative studies. From the time of the Greek philosopher Aristotle it was debated whether the embryo was a preformed, miniature individual (a homunculus) or an undifferentiated form that gradually became specialized.Supporters of the latter theory included Aristotle; the English physician William Harvey, who labeled the theory epigenesis; the German physician Caspar Friedrick Wolff; and the Prussian-Estonian scientist Karl Ernst, Ritter von Baer, who proved epigenesis with his discovery of the mammalian ovum (egg) in 1827. Other pioneers were the French scientists Pierre Belon and Marie-François-Xavier Bichat. ))
https://www.britannica.com/science/embryology
اما جالينوس فقد صرح بان جسد الجنين يتكون من قسمين : قسم من ماء الرجل و قسم من دم المراة و لم يصرح ابدا بنظرية الجنين القزم نقرا من Meyer Essays on the History of Embryology Volume 2
((On the basis of their origin, Galen divided all parts of the body into two classes. One class of organs which was said to arise from sperm was called partes spermaticae, and the other class, partes sanguineae, because he believed they arose from the blood. This classification of Galen continued in use for several hundred years, and well illustrates the danger of speculation. ))
https://embryology.med.unsw.edu.au/e...f_Embryology_2
اما ابقراط فقد صرح بان الجنين يتكون من اختلاط ماء الرجل بماء المراة (مخالفا لمن بعده كارسو و جالينوس) الا انه صرح بان لحم الانسان يتكون نتيجة تجلط دم المراة في الرحم و ان العظام تنشا نتيجة الحرارة المركزة على دم المراة المتجلط في رحمها .
نقرا من كتاب The Hippocratic Treatises "On Generation", On the Nature of the Child الصفحة 7-8 :
(( The seed, then , is contained in a membrane, and it breathes in and out. Moreover it grows because of its mother's blood, which descends to the womb.... At this stage with the descent and coagulation of the mother's blood, flesh begins to be formed with the umbilicus through which the embryo breathes and grows, projecting from the center))
نقرا من نفس المصدر السابق الصفحة 9:
(( The bones grow hard as a result of the coagulating action of heat; moreover they send out branches like a tree. Both the interior and exterior of the body now begin to separate into parts more distinctly))
و نقرا من مقال لKaren Wellner بعنوان A History of Embryology (1959), by Joseph Needham من The Embryo Project Encyclopedia
(( The first written record of embryological research is attributed to Hippocrates (460 BC–370 BC) who wrote about obstetrics and gynecology. In this regard Needham declares that Hippocrates, and not Aristotle, should be recognized as the first true embryologist. Hippocrates believed that the embryo began development by extracting moisture and breath from the mother and he identified a series of condensations and fires that were responsible for the development of bones, belly, and circulation in the embryo and fetus. He also supported the view that the human fetus gained nourishment by sucking blood from the placenta. Needham credits Hippocrates with being one of the first to allude to the concept of preformationism with the Greek physician’s belief that organisms were fully formed in miniature inside germ cells. This belief helped give rise to theological embryology or the idea that various souls entered the embryo as it grew.))
https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/history...joseph-needham
و على هذا يتبين ان ردود المنصرين في هذه المسالة ما هي الا اوهام و اكاذيب لا تسمن و لا تغني من جوع و لا تغني عن الحق شيئا فهي مجرد ترقيعات فاشلة ناتجة عن جهل عميق بالثقافات و الافكار القديمة المتعلقة بمراحل تكون الجنين .
هذا وصلى الله على سيدنا محمد و على اله وصحبه وسلم
نقرا من سفر ايوب الاصحاح العاشر
9 اُذْكُرْ أَنَّكَ جَبَلْتَنِي كَالطِّينِ، أَفَتُعِيدُنِي إِلَى التُّرَابِ؟
10 أَلَمْ تَصُبَّنِي كَاللَّبَنِ، وَخَثَّرْتَنِي كَالْجُبْنِ؟
11 كَسَوْتَنِي جِلْدًا وَلَحْمًا، فَنَسَجْتَنِي بِعِظَامٍ وَعَصَبٍ.
اعتقدت شعوب منطقة الشرق الاوسط و خاصة الهلال الخصيب ان الجنين يتكون في رحم امه نتيجة تخثر مني الرجل اذا خالط دم المراة (حيضها) و ان هذا هو السبب الرئيسي لعدم حيض المراة طوال فترة حملها و هذا ما يشير اليه نص العدد العاشر اعلاه حيث يشبه ماء الرجل باللبن و تخثره كتخثر الجبن !!!.
و هذا الاعتقاد لمراجل تكون الجنين كان سائدا لدى الشعوب القديمة - كما اسلفنا - من القرن الثالث و الرابع قبل الميلاد و حتى القرن السابع عشر و الثامن عشر وممن اشاروا الى هذه النظرية بوجه او باخر: ابقراط و ارسطو و جالينوس .
نقرا من كتاب Text Book Of Embryology الصفحة 2:
(( Before the 17th century embryological knowledge was based on the writings of Aristotle and Galen. Embryology as a branch of biology was initiated by the famous Greek philosopher Aristotle He was the first embryologist to describe the development and reproduction of many kinds of organisms in his book entitled "Degeneration Animalium". He believed firmly that the complex adult organism develops from a simple formless beginning.Thus he laid the foundation for the basic principles of epigenesist a theory postulated after 2000 years later. For this Aristotle is honored as the father of embryology. Aristotle has written that the male contributes the semen and the female contributes the contamenia....... He had no knowledge of ovary. He thought that the female reproductive system is formed of uterus only and not of anything else. The cantamenia represents the material foundation of the embryo. The development is activated and guided by the semen. The semen contributes nothing material to the embryo ))
نقرا مقال من The Embryo Project Encyclopedia تاليف : Dorothy Regan Haskett, Valerie Racine, Joanna Yang
((Throughout his works, Aristotle expounded an empirical form of scientific investigation of the natural world and contributed to the field of embryology. His embryological work remained relevant for centuries, and during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, when new technologies became available for scientists to observe developmental processes,Aristotle's theories resulted in controversies. Early microscopic observers reported what they claimed were miniature humans in either sperm or egg cells. In the late seventeenth century, the theory of preformation became popular among natural philosophers. The theory held that an embryo is a miniature version of an adult organism, and that the adult emerges as the embryo gets bigger. By the eighteenth century, preformation became the dominant theory of embryonic development, gaining proponents who dismissed Aristotle's theory of epigenesis.))
https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/aristotle-384-322-bce
وهذا التشابه راجع كما قلنا الى ان كاتب سفر ايوب تاثر بالجو الثقافي الذي كان سائدا حينما الف السفر .
نقرا من التفسير الحديث للكتاب المقدس لسفر ايوب الصفحة 20 - 21 :
(( ان كتابا كسفر ايوب لم يكتب من فراغ فالله وحده هو الذي يخلق من العدم و مخلوقاته تستخدم المواد التي اعطاها لهم و العقل يؤدي وظيفته من واقع التجربة الانسانية و من حصيلة الثقفاة البشرية. فاذا كان المرء حصل على قدر واف من التعليم فانه يزود بافكار الاخرين . و كاتب سفر ايوب لم يكن حساسا وذكيا فقط بل كان ذي تجربة و مثقفا و يمكن ايضا ان نستشف من السفر المجتمع الذي كان يغذي فكره. اننا لا نعرف مقدار ما حصل عليه من تعليم من قراءة السفر او من مناقشة انواع الصور البلاغية في كتابه او من رحلاته . و لا نعرف ان كان يستطيع قراءة لغات اخرى خلاف اللغة العبرية لنعرف ان كان اقتبس مباشرة من ادب الدول المجاورة .
و لكن مهما يكن الباعث فان فنه فريد في بابه و لكن ليس منعزلا . ففي المقام الاول فانه متفق مع تقاليد شعبه ، انه اسرائيلي في الجوهر و العقيدة و في نفس الوقت عالمي في انسانيته، فهو عينه من نوع الادب السائد في العالم القديم و الذي كان ادبا عالميا في طبيعته ذلك الادب الذي يسمى على نطاق واسع ادب " الحكمة" ))
و نقرا من نفس المصدر الصفحة 165 :
(( اذا كانت بعض صيحات ايوب الثائرة قد جعلتنا نخشى انه في خطر الانزلاق الى عدم الايمان فهذه القصيدة الجميلة عن الخليقة توضح ان ايوب مؤمن تماما بمقاصد الله الحسنة (انظر التعليق على 10: 3) في خلقه للانسان . و هو يستخدم ثلاث او اربع صور جميلة مستمدة من التكنلوجيا ليحكي قصة بداءة الانسان، ..... واكثر الصور وضوحا تخشر الجسم كالجبن (10) و هي صورة فريدة في العهد القديم ))
نقرا في هامش الصفحة تعليقا على ما سبق :
(( (1) تحدث الكتاب المتاخرون بعد ذلك عن تجلط المني او الدم حتى يصبح جنينا ))
و نقرا من الترجمة الرهبانية اليسوعية الصفحة 1065 في الهامش تعليقا على ايوب 10: 10:
(( كان العلم الطبي القديم يتصور تكون الجنين كتجمد دم الام بتاثير عنصر الزرع ))
و نقرا من John Trapp Complete Commentary :
((And curdled me like cheese?] Sic castissimo ore, et elegantibus metaphoris, saith an interpreter; i.e. Thus, in a most modest manner, and with elegant metaphors, doth Job, as a great philosopher, set out man’s conception in the womb.Aristotle (whose manner is obscurioribus obscura implicare, as Bodin observeth) hath some such expression as this, but nothing so clear and full (Bodin. Theat. Natur., 434. Arist. de Gen. Anim. cap. 20 )
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jtc/job-10.html
و نقرا من George Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary:
((Milked. Hebrew, "poured me out as milk, and curdled me like cheese?" (Haydock) --- See Wisdom vii. 1. The ancients explained our origin by the comparison of milk curdled, or cheese; (Arist.[Aristotle?] i. 10.; Pliny, [Natural History?] vii. 15.) which the moderns have explained on more plausible principles. (Calmet) --- Yet still we may acknowledge our ignorance with the mother of Machabees, 2 Machabees vii. 22. ))https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/hcc/job-10.html
و هذا ما دفع المؤرخ جوزيف نيدهام في كتابه A History of Embryology بالتصريح بان النظرية التي تبناها الاقدمون عن مراحل تكون الجنين هي بالضبط ما اشار اليه سفر ايوب 10: 10
(( 'During the period when the biological school of Alexandria was at its height, that city became an important Jewish centre. Two centuries later It was to produce Philo, but now the Alexandrian Jews were writing that part of the modem Bible known as the Wisdom Literature. In books such as the Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus , Proverbs, etc. the typical Hellenic exclusion of gods in natural phenomena is clearly to be seen. There are two passages of embryological importance. Firstly, in the Book of Job (x. to), Job is made to say,Remember, I beseech thee, that thou hast fashioned me as clay; and wilt thou bring me into the dust again? Host thou not poured me out as milk, and curdled me like cheese? Thou hast clothed me with skin and flah, and knit me together with bones and sinews.
This comparison of embryology with the making of cheese is interesting in view of the fact that precisely the same comparison occurs in Aristotle’s book On the Generation of animals, as we have already seen.‘ Still more extraordinary, the only other embryological reference in the Wisdom Literature, which occurs in the Wisdom of Solomon (vii. 2), also copies an Aristotelian theory, namely, that the embryo is formed from (menstrual) blood))
و من كلام جوزيف نيدهام نرى ان الفكرة نفسها تتكرر في نص اخر من نصوص العهد القديم عند الارثذوكس و الكاثوليك
حيث نقرا في سفر الحكمة الاصحاح السابع :
2 وفي مدة عشرة اشهر صنعت من الدم بزرع الرجل واللذة التي تصاحب النوم .
بل نجد الفكرة نفسها ايضا موجودة في العهد الجديد !!!!
نقرا من انجيل يوحنا الاصحاح الاول :
13 اَلَّذِينَ وُلِدُوا لَيْسَ مِنْ دَمٍ، وَلاَ مِنْ مَشِيئَةِ جَسَدٍ، وَلاَ مِنْ مَشِيئَةِ رَجُل، بَلْ مِنَ اللهِ.
وقد استخدم ترتليان (قرن ثاني) هذا النص لتاكيد نفس الفكرة السابقة عن عملية التخثر التي تحصل عند التقاء ماء الرجل بدم المراة في رحمها
نقرا من كتاب ترتليان De Carne Christ الفصل 19 :
((19 'What then is the meaning of, Was born not of blood nor of thewill of the flesh nor of the will of a man, but of God?'1 This text will
be of more use to me than to them, when I have refuted those
who falsify it. For they maintain that it was thus written, Were
born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh or of a man, but of God,2 as
though it referred to the above-mentioned believers in his name:3
and from it they try to prove that there exists that mystic seed of
the elect and spiritual which they baptize for themselves. But
how can it mean this, when those who believe in the name of the
Lord are all of them by the common law of human kind born of
blood and of the will of the flesh and of a man, as also is Valentinus
himself? Consequently the singular is correct, as referring
to the Lord--was born . . . of God. Rightly so, because the Word is
God's, and with the Word is God's Spirit, and in the Spirit is
God's power, and God's everything that Christ is. As flesh,
however, he was not born of blood, nor of the will of the flesh
and of a man, because the Word was made flesh by the will of
God: for it is to his flesh, not to the Word, that this denial of a
nativity after our pattern applies; and the reason is that it was
the flesh, not the Word, which might have been expected to be
born that way. 'But in denying, among other things, that he was
born of the will of the flesh, surely it also denies that he was born
of the substance of flesh.' No: because neither does the denial that
he was born of blood involve any repudiation of the substance of
flesh, but of the material of the seed, which material it is agreed is
the heat of the blood, as it were by despumation changed into
a coagulator of the woman's blood. For from the coagulator there
is in cheese a function of that substance, namely milk, which by
chemical action it causes to solidify. We understand, then, a denial
that the Lord's nativity was the result of coition (which is the
meaning of the will of a man and of the flesh), but no denial that it
was by a partaking of the womb. And why indeed does the
evangelist with such amplification insist that the Lord was born
not of blood nor of the will of the flesh or of a man, except that
his flesh was such as no one would suspect was not born of coition? ))
http://www.tertullian.org/articles/e...carn_04eng.htm
ملاحظة :
حاول بعض المنصرين الرد على الانتقادات التي وجهت الى نص ايوب 10: 10 بالادعاء بان النص خالف المعتقد السائد لثقافة عصره اذ ان السائد انذاك - حسب كلامهم- كانت نظرية الانسان القزم و هي النظرية القائمة على ان ماء الرجل يحمل جنينا قزما بداخله حيث يستقر هذا الجنين في رحم المراة ثم يبدا بالتضخم شيئا فشيئا !!!!
و اقول ردا على هذا الكذب الفاضح :
1. ان نظرية الجنين القزم لم تكن سائدة الا في القرنين السابع عشر و الثامن عشر واما قبل ذلك و منذ القرنين الثالث و الرابع قبل الميلاد فقد كانت نظرية التخثر الناتج من ماء الرجل و دم المراة هي النظرية السائدة لدى شعوب المنطقة .
نقرا من كتاب Text Book Of Embryology الصفحة 2:
(( Before the 17th century embryological knowledge was based on the writings of Aristotle and Galen. Embryology as a branch of biology was initiated by the famous Greek philosopher Aristotle He was the first embryologist to describe the development and reproduction of many kinds of organisms in his book entitled "Degeneration Animalium". He believed firmly that the complex adult organism develops from a simple formless beginning.Thus he laid the foundation for the basic principles of epigenesist a theory postulated after 2000 years later. For this Aristotle is honored as the father of embryology. Aristotle has written that the male contributes the semen and the female contributes the contamenia....... He had no knowledge of ovary. He thought that the female reproductive system is formed of uterus only and not of anything else. The cantamenia represents the material foundation of the embryo. The development is activated and guided by the semen. The semen contributes nothing material to the embryo ))
2. القول بان ابقراط و ارسطو و جالينوس قالو بنظرية الجنين القزم هو عين الكذب !!
اذ ان ارسطو ذكر النظريتين الا انه رجح نظرية التخثر كما اسلفنا .
نقرا من الموسوعة البريطانية :
((Embryology, the study of the formation and development of an embryo and fetus. Before widespread use of the microscope and the advent of cellular biology in the 19th century, embryology was based on descriptive and comparative studies. From the time of the Greek philosopher Aristotle it was debated whether the embryo was a preformed, miniature individual (a homunculus) or an undifferentiated form that gradually became specialized.Supporters of the latter theory included Aristotle; the English physician William Harvey, who labeled the theory epigenesis; the German physician Caspar Friedrick Wolff; and the Prussian-Estonian scientist Karl Ernst, Ritter von Baer, who proved epigenesis with his discovery of the mammalian ovum (egg) in 1827. Other pioneers were the French scientists Pierre Belon and Marie-François-Xavier Bichat. ))
https://www.britannica.com/science/embryology
اما جالينوس فقد صرح بان جسد الجنين يتكون من قسمين : قسم من ماء الرجل و قسم من دم المراة و لم يصرح ابدا بنظرية الجنين القزم نقرا من Meyer Essays on the History of Embryology Volume 2
((On the basis of their origin, Galen divided all parts of the body into two classes. One class of organs which was said to arise from sperm was called partes spermaticae, and the other class, partes sanguineae, because he believed they arose from the blood. This classification of Galen continued in use for several hundred years, and well illustrates the danger of speculation. ))
https://embryology.med.unsw.edu.au/e...f_Embryology_2
اما ابقراط فقد صرح بان الجنين يتكون من اختلاط ماء الرجل بماء المراة (مخالفا لمن بعده كارسو و جالينوس) الا انه صرح بان لحم الانسان يتكون نتيجة تجلط دم المراة في الرحم و ان العظام تنشا نتيجة الحرارة المركزة على دم المراة المتجلط في رحمها .
نقرا من كتاب The Hippocratic Treatises "On Generation", On the Nature of the Child الصفحة 7-8 :
(( The seed, then , is contained in a membrane, and it breathes in and out. Moreover it grows because of its mother's blood, which descends to the womb.... At this stage with the descent and coagulation of the mother's blood, flesh begins to be formed with the umbilicus through which the embryo breathes and grows, projecting from the center))
نقرا من نفس المصدر السابق الصفحة 9:
(( The bones grow hard as a result of the coagulating action of heat; moreover they send out branches like a tree. Both the interior and exterior of the body now begin to separate into parts more distinctly))
و نقرا من مقال لKaren Wellner بعنوان A History of Embryology (1959), by Joseph Needham من The Embryo Project Encyclopedia
(( The first written record of embryological research is attributed to Hippocrates (460 BC–370 BC) who wrote about obstetrics and gynecology. In this regard Needham declares that Hippocrates, and not Aristotle, should be recognized as the first true embryologist. Hippocrates believed that the embryo began development by extracting moisture and breath from the mother and he identified a series of condensations and fires that were responsible for the development of bones, belly, and circulation in the embryo and fetus. He also supported the view that the human fetus gained nourishment by sucking blood from the placenta. Needham credits Hippocrates with being one of the first to allude to the concept of preformationism with the Greek physician’s belief that organisms were fully formed in miniature inside germ cells. This belief helped give rise to theological embryology or the idea that various souls entered the embryo as it grew.))
https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/history...joseph-needham
و على هذا يتبين ان ردود المنصرين في هذه المسالة ما هي الا اوهام و اكاذيب لا تسمن و لا تغني من جوع و لا تغني عن الحق شيئا فهي مجرد ترقيعات فاشلة ناتجة عن جهل عميق بالثقافات و الافكار القديمة المتعلقة بمراحل تكون الجنين .
هذا وصلى الله على سيدنا محمد و على اله وصحبه وسلم
