Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

Society Religion & Philosophy
101

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

Thank you for your opinions

102

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

Ok this side topic has been interesting ... it is being dealt in other threads ... for this thread I wanted to see how evolution is compatible with Islam. As I said I'm not the only voice of dissent and for sure different pro-evolution scientists are finding different ways to explain evolution - taking evolution as the said mechanism ...

This thread is about looking at evolution and seeing Islam will point or make suggestions towards evolution ... just as it does regarding scientific facts. Now I'm not claiming Qur'an directly explains scientific facts in detail, but where relevant material is present it makes statements that are compatible with the agreed opinion. I can fairly confidently say - it says this regarding most if not all agreed scientific facts, but I have not yet come across verses that point towards evolution.

103

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

Credentials are important.. Just like you check the credentials of the the mullah you follow.. I check the credentials of Scientist making Scientific claims when I refer to matters of Scientific importance..

104

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

I jumped in to this thread when you made a sweeping statement that "Evolution is a dogma".. just to ensure you don't misguide the readers through your self claimed knowledge, piety, and honesty..

Next time just write "In my opinion evolution is a dogma" and I'll avoid derailing your thread to enable you to continue your valuable discussion..

105

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

I stand warned

106

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution … Or unkind dismissal?

evolution is still a theory but it has backing from somequarters as the scientific answer to our current being. this theory is important to islam as its one of the balancers of Allahs test. its said that there will come a time when conversion to islam will not benefit anyone as the proof for it will be too great, removing the believing factor. likewise athiest science theories are just as important but they are, in a way, good for our iman although they will take a certain proportion of mankind with them to falsehood

of course science never stands still, and its prevailing theories always have some evidence, thats why i do believe the current evolution theories will be like the flat earth theory of bygoneperiods. as the technology moves on and different techniques are devised to evaluate evidences. looking back at science of yesterday is always a :facepalm: moment

107

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution … Or unkind dismissal?

You conveniently ignored my post on 2nd page of this thread. If there are no evolutionary processes at work than how do bacteria become resistant to antibiotics? While were are at here is some more info you might find useful. These 2 are scholarly papers (not news paper articles).

The evolution of flea-borne transmissio… [Curr Issues Mol Biol. 2005] - PubMed - NCBI

Microevolution and history of the p… [Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004] - PubMed - NCBI

Also Luria–Delbrück experiment from wiki

Luria

108

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution … Or unkind dismissal?

Peace Shamraz Khan

I said “Evolution is not testable” and you have conveniently translated that as being “no evolutionary processes at work” - This is not the same thing - I meant evolution in all its parts is not testable … because the main area of contention - i.e. speciation - or macroevolution (not microevolution) is said to take “many millions of years” no test can last that long …

Anyway, how is evolution as a theory (tested or untested) compatible with Islam?

109

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

Established Islamic ideas? Established yes, interpreted no. Islamic ideas can be interpreted in many ways.
Evolution is established and it is fact. If you refuse to admit that evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of evolution, then its because your are simly unreasonable and basing your objection on your own dogmatic beliefs and nothing else.

When you speak of truths, you are referring to religious beliefs, not science. Relgious truth are immutable. Science is not written in stone, it can change if new evidence is shown.

110

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

This is interesting ... So science is not truth? I'm sort of inclined to agree ... Is there such a thing as religious truth and/or scientific truth? Is there such a thing as The Truth? Regardless of science or faith?

111

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

[quote]
Peace kchughtai

**To you 'kun fa yahoon' means exactly what then? So the creation of mankind came about in a gradual way through many generations spanning hundreds of thousands of years and this to you means .... That Allah says to it "Be" and it is ... This is an outright lie ...

** *The kuffaar of early Arabia ...were being told something to their understanding ... Both the early Muslims and through time until now we know what this terms means and you are saying it means a gradual occurrence.
*
Well I'm not surprised ... For a person who believes the Dajjal destruction at the hands of Isa (AS) also hapepens gradually .... Five khalifas and still no end to Dajjal ...

It means as soon as Allah (SWT) says something to "Be" it is Willed into existence without delay ... Each and every moment is being willed into creation and willed to destruction for the next moment ... By Him ...

When you look at the verses of the Quran ... They have an apparent meaning and a deeper more technical meaning ... But the beauty of the Qur'an is that the inner, deeper, technical meaning does in NO compromise the apparent meaning ... Here you are forcing this meaning and creating a big problem with the verse in its apparent state.
[/quote]

O Psyah, the righteous, the all-knowing,

kindly stay with what I stated and don't put words in my mouth. I didn't take part in the debate for evolution for the reason that my knowledge on this issue is very small so unlike you I don't like poking my nose in each and everything whether I know or not. My statement was on 'Kun Fa Yaqoon'. It is often translated to mean something magical. My contention was that it doesn't always that way. It may mean that certain thing start happening. takes its course (designed the Almighty) and takes the complete shape. What is wrong with that? Perhaps you had an objection on my using the word 'evolve' or 'evolution'. Ok, consider it 'develop'. Happy ? (I don't think so).
I gave you two examples to break the myth of sudden and magical creation from Quran. Can you contest these two examples based on Quran? Of course, things started happening suddenly as decreed by Allah as in the case of Jesus(as), this universe. I am sure, If we had not known about Jesus(as) you would have said that as God said 'Be' and he was there before the people all-grown up.

[QUOTE]
It means as soon as Allah (SWT) says something to "Be" it is Willed into existence without delay
[/QUOTE]
where did I say otherwise?

[QUOTE]

*The kuffaar of early Arabia ...were being told something to their understanding ... *

[/QUOTE]

Are you out of your mind or something? what was their understanding. This is another attempt to neglect the Quran and fit philosophy of your sheikhs to interpret Quran

[QUOTE]
When you look at the verses of the Quran ... They have an apparent meaning and a deeper more technical meaning ... But the beauty of the Qur'an is that the inner, deeper, technical meaning does in NO compromise the apparent meaning ... Here you are forcing this meaning and creating a big problem with the verse in its apparent state.
[/QUOTE]

you are talking about deep and technical meaning who always love to jump up and down on very literal meaning and often even unclad it of commonsense as well. How am I creating a problem / conflict? don't get it.

btw, why are you dragging the issue of dajjal here. There are already half a dozen threads on this topic started by you and your buddy LKK. tide of dajjal was stemmed by the promised Messiah(as) in india and his followers in Africa as well (a few examples). If get some time, I will collect the info on this and let you know. btw, what is your definition of defeat of dajjal? removing goraas from political power? (perhaps that will also happen as happened with the followers of Isa(as) in 3rd century AD). or converting them all?

btw, I can also pose similar questions to you but I have no intention of wasting my time with you. Direct your attention to med911 and yazdi as you haven't presented case from your side at all. now let me see what was the op

[QUOTE]
Please discuss the bases for asserting evolution does not undermine the Qur'an.
[/QUOTE]
.
Pls develop the case based on Quran. this is still due as what is the take of Quran wrt to evolution?

112

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

^ good points kchughtai ...

I will look into answering your last question some time soon ... I actually want to show that science is in the Qur'an and hence evolution should also be in there to the same level as other science is there ...

113

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

I think humans were always humans, animals were always animals, microbes were always microbes, vegetables were always vegetables, fruits were always fruits ...

But all of these things went through evolutionary changes over time, for example, people in Africa developed thicker skin because of the harsh weather, mountain tigers have a thicker fur than the land tigers because of the snow, olive that grows in california is different in taste then the olive that grows in Arab region because of the weather conditions, people in Japan became short statured because of prolonged droughts, gala apple is different from fuji apple, infact there are 20+ different types of apples because of the gene mutation over time ...

Having said that, alot of monkeys look and act like humans, because there was a time when God turned many nations into monkeys, because they were rebellious and they didnt want to change their evil ways.

114

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

Apart from the references where it shows that the humans that were turned into monkeys died off ... So leaving all monkey as simply monkeys ... I can agree with the rest of your post ...

115

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

Yes its absolute mental gymnastics to try and say that God didn't tell the arabs about evolution because he couldn't think of a way to make them understand. This is just a method for you to try and integrate your two beliefs. You really believe god to be so limited?

Evolution says that our species arose from a previous species which was also a common ancestor to other apes.

God tells us that he created the first man from clay (dust mixed with water). We didn't arise from a previous species.

There is no middle ground where these two beliefs can be harmonized. Either one contradicts the other. It is an act of mental gymnastics to try and do so.

116

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

This is interesting and I'd like to add my own two cents but I'm not sure if it is valid.

Your creating two definitions when in reality only one should exist.

A fact in science to put it simply is an observation that is taken to be true. Facts in themselves do not necessarily describe explanations (this is important). Again, facts are simply observations that are made that are taken to be true. The element of truth is also important.

A hypothesis is a proposed explanation towards observed facts, and when generally accepted to be true becomes a theory. And hypotheses generally begin to be described by facts as a more correct understanding of explanations is obtained.

The muddling of language becomes apparent when you consider that as a hypothesis moves towards a theory, it can be taken as factual in a sense because it is considered a true observation.

I think the problem is fact and theory (and observation but that is another topic) are somewhat inseparable from one another. I think the word that they should have used is a scientific theory is factual, that it is based in fact and therefore share an element of truth. The question then arises if something is factual is it a fact? I think the answer to this question is yes.

According to scientists, the theory of evolution (natural selection amongst others I guess) is a fact because it is a true observation, it is something that actually occurs.

117

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution … Or unkind dismissal?

Scientifically which one has more credibility…that we’re made out of clay/mud or we evolved from other species?

Top 10 Hybrid Animals » Hemmy.net - A source of varied interests

118

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

In purely scientific terms..

Evolution is a "fact".. explained by the theory of evolution..

Just like

Gravity is a fact explained by the theory of relativity which replaced an earlier theory of gravity by Newton..

just like

Existence of atoms is a fact

Explained by the modern Atomic Theory

just like

Heliocentricism (in solar system) is a fact

Explained by the Heliocentric Theory..

As we have better scientific exposure there may be correction-alteration-addition in the theories.. but these changes in the explanations (theories) are not expected to change the "scientific fact" which are already established.. The most authentic definition of "scientific facts" is the one given by NAS (National Academy of Sciences).. which is at present the most credible science academy in the world with 2200 members who are the highest achievers in the field of science including 300 living Nobel Laureates..

NAS endorses evolution as a scientific fact.. it is used as the basis for curriculum in almost every country for science-bilological studies. The charter of accepting evolution as a fact is signed by 68 National Academies from across the globe including most of the Muslim countries. Studying Biology today without accepting evolution as a fact is considered equivalent to studying Mathematics without numbers..

119

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

Peace MirwaisHotak

I am not creating these definitions ... I have interpreted the paragraph that was posted by yazdi ...

Actually I didn't have a problem with the term "fact" having two different definitions ... what I have a problem with is how people feel they can interchange between those definitions at will.

The term "fact" is a linguistic term which has all its array of meanings.

According to me a "fact" is EITHER similiar and according to definition 1 - i.e. observable phenomenon ratified by multiple observations made by multiple people of sane mind and who are telling the truth (These types of facts are things or actions that actually EXIST)... OR ... a "fact" is some ASSOCIATED INFORMATION about something that **exists, **only when that associated information has been proven or SHOWN to be associated to that entity.

In science a "theory" would be unproven associated information, thus talking about either the "nature" of something or explaining how something "happens" ... when this information is proven to be correctly assigned to that entity then it is called a "law" ...

Laws help us formulate predictable models to aid us in our scientific work.

One can argue that a "law" is a "fact" ... I'm not bothered ... BUT what really bothers me is a theory should be formulated around what is "known to exist - a fact as per definition 1" - in other words the evolution scientists are busy formulating a theory around an "action" that has not been shown to be a "fact" itself first ... and then they sell the whole idea as a "fact" ...

I can only entertain the idea of evolution theory - when I have seen the "act" of evolution to be true. Such scientists argue in support of evolution by merging these two definitions ... they say evolution is an explanation ... thus getting away from the requisite of observing the evolving act ... they have lots of people who ratify the theory, all who do so without observing the "act", they have tested parts of evolution - because it is a compound theory - which utilises other theories, but then makes intuitive leaps to conclude more than what can be tested ... however when they argue for crossing off the "test" box ... they do it using the tests performed on the sub-theories (which in fact are stand alone theories) ... When they pull this all together - they conclude evolution is a "fact" - as per definition 2 ... but Definition 2 requires all of this explanation to be done around something that EXISTS ... i.e. An aspect of Definition 2 is subject to Definition 1 ...

120

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

Peace yazdi

The red = observable
The blue = non-observable
The green = defunct (we are not absolutely heliocentric),

All three of these cannot all be "facts"