So Muhammed's womb theory was NEW ?
WRONG
History of Embryology:
Garbha Upinandas 1416 BC: the Hindus describing ancient ideas concerning the embryo
"From the conjugation of blood and semen the embryo comes into existence. During the period favorable to conception, after the sexual intercourse, (it) becomes a Kalada (one-day-old embryo). After remaining seven nights it becomes a vesicle. After a fortnight it becomes a sperical mass. After a month it becomes a firm mass"
Book of Job ca. 1000 BC:
"Your hands formed me and made me - will you now absorb me? Remember that you formed me as if with clay - will you return me to dust? You poured me out like milk, and pulled me together like cheese. You clothed me with skin and flesh, and [inside me] did you interweave bones and sinews." -- Job 10:8-11
Hippocrates 460-370 BC:
1st stage: "Sperm is a product which comes from the whole body of each parent, weak sperm coming from the weak parts, and strong sperm from the strong parts." Section 8, p 321
2nd stage: "The seed (embryo), then, is contained in a membrane ... Moreover, it grows because of its mother's blood, which descends to the womb. For once a woman conceives, she ceases to menstruate..." Section 14, p. 326
3rd stage: "At this stage, with the descent and coagulation of the mother's blood, flesh begins to be formed, with the umbilicus." Section 14, p. 326
4th stage: "As the flesh grows it is formed into distinct members by breath ... The bones grow hard ... moreover they send out branches like a tree ..." Section 17, p. 328
Aristotle 384-322 BC:
"When the material secreted by the female in the uterus has been fixed by the semen of the male [...] the more solid part comes together, the liquid is separated off from it, and as the earthy parts solidify membranes form all around it [...] Some of these are called membranes and others choria[.]" -- Aristotle, De Generatione Animalium, Book II, 739b20-739b30, as per Jonathan Barnes (ed.), The Complete Works of Aristotle, (Princeton, 1985), Vol 1, p. 1148.
"So nature has first designed the two blood vessels from the heart, and from these smaller vessels branch off to the uterus, forming what is called the umbilicus [...] Round these is a skin-like integument, because the weakness of the vessels needs protection and shelter. The vessels join to the uterus like the roots of plants, and through them the embryo receives its nourishment" -- Aristotle, De Generatione Animalium, Book II, 740a28-740a35, as per Barnes, opere citato, p. 1149
Diocles of Carystus 240-180 BC:
"on the ninth day a few points of blood, on the eighteenth beating of the heart, on the twenty-seventh traces of the spinal cord and head"
Galen 129-210 AD:
"let us divide the creation of the foetus overall into four periods of time.
The first is that in which. as is seen both in abortions and in dissection, the form of the semen prevails (Arabic nutfah). At this time, Hippocrates too, the all-marvelous, does not yet call the conformation of the animal a foetus; as we heard just now in the case of semen voided in the sixth day, he still calls it semen. But when it has been filled with blood (Arabic alaqa), and heart, brain and liver are still unarticulated and unshaped yet have by now a certain solidarity and considerable size,
this is the second period; the substance of the foetus has the form of flesh and no longer the form of semen. Accordingly you would find that Hippocrates too no longer calls such a form semen but, as was said, foetus.
The third period follows on this, when, as was said, it is possible to see the three ruling parts clearly and a kind of outline, a silhouette, as it were, of all the other parts (Arabic mudghah). You will see the conformation of the three ruling parts more clearly, that of the parts of the stomach more dimly, and much more still, that of the limbs. Later on they form "twigs", as Hippocrates expressed it, indicating by the term their similarity to branches.
The fourth and final period is at the stage when all the parts in the limbs have been differentiated; and at this part Hippocrates the marvelous no longer calls the foetus an embryo only, but already a child, too when he says that it jerks and moves as an animal now fully formed " -- Corpus Medicorum Graecorum: Galeni de Semine (Galen: On Semen) (Greek text with English trans. Phillip de Lacy, Akademic Verlag, 1992) section I:9:1-10 pp. 92-95, 101
"... The time has come for nature to articulate the organs precisely and to bring all the parts to completion. Thus it caused flesh to grow on and around all the bones, and at the same time ... it made at the ends of the bones ligaments that bind them to each other, and along their entire length it placed around them on all sides thin membranes, called periosteal, on which it caused flesh to grow " -- Corpus Medicorum Graecorum: Galeni de Semine (Galen: On Semen) (Greek text with English trans. Phillip de Lacy, Akademic Verlag, 1992) section I:9:1-10 pp. 92-95, 101
Talmud: Samuel ha-Yehudi 2nd century AD:
The embryo was called peri habbetten (fruit of the body) and develops as
1. golem (formless, rolled-up thing);
2. shefir meruqqam (embroidered foetus - shefir means amniotic sac);
3. 'ubbar (something carried); v'alad (child); v'alad shel qayama (noble or viable child) and
4. ben she-kallu chadashav (child whose months have been completed).
Muhammed 571-632 AD:
how it should read
"And we created man from a portion of clay. Then we made him a drop in a firm place. Then we formed the drop into a clot, then we formed the clot into a morsel, then we formed the morsel into bones, then we clothed the bones with flesh. Then we brought it forth as another creation. Blessed is Allaah, the best of creators." [23:13-14]
how it is read by islamic dellusional optimists:
"Thereafter We made him (the offspring of Adam) as a Nutfah (mixed drops of the male and female sexual discharge and lodged it) in a safe lodging (womb of the woman). Then We made the Nutfah into a clot (Alaqa, a piece of thick coagulated blood), then We made the clot into a little lump of flesh (Mudghah), then We made out of that little lump of flesh bones, then We clothed the bones with flesh, and then We brought it forth as another creation. So blessed be Allah, the Best of Creators!" [23:13-14]
False assumptions in the theory:
1) The Qur'an stated that the blood clot was turned to bone and then God "clothed the bones with flesh" (Quran 23:13-14). It is scientific fact that living tissue forms first, and then bones grow at a later time, and continue to gain strength (by building calcium) for many years after birth. Therefore, this is one of many scientific inaccuracies in the Qur'an
2) An embryo is not a "clot of thick blood" at any point in human development. Muhammad probably saw a miscarried embryo, and made this incorrect assumption. Incidentally, the clotted blood in a miscarriage is mostly from the mother, not the embryo. Another possible explanation for this error is that Muhammad believed the prevailing Aristotelian common "wisdom" of his day. Aristotle believed that children were conceived from the action of male semen upon female menstrual blood. (Aristotle (English trans. A. L. Peck, Heinemann, 1953), Generation of Animals, 717b)
3) This hadith echoes sura 23:14, which mentions the three stages of embryological development (nutfah, alaqa and mudghah) then says the embryo is "another creation". According to this hadith the human foetus was not completely formed until 120 days of gestation, which contradicts what has just been said above.
4) It doesn't take the knowledge of God to make a vague assumption of what happens when a woman's belly is swelling and having a child pop out nine months later... any HUMAN with a decent brain knows the child is being created. Muhammed just pulled a embryology theory out of his arse.
In conclusion then there is not a single statement contained in the Qur'an relating to modern embryology that was not well known through direct observation by the ancient Greek and Indian physicians many centuries before the Qur'an was written. Morever, much of what the Qur'an actually does say about embryology is scientifically inaccurate.... Yet you still believe such vague and incorrect pseudo-science could only have come from Allah?