Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?

Society Religion & Philosophy
441

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?

I will use your own example to clarify my view point.
We know all life forms are made of Amino acids.. the chemical composition of life forms and dust clay is very different on periodic table for elements . Now if you start taking the literal meaning and insist that human/life was directly made from dust and clay.. I think you start denying the science. However if you do not take this statement in literal scientific manner.. may be the scripture is telling you that humans/Adam did not arrive from anywhere but evolved in this earthen environment only... from the very dust and clay which exists on this planet.
We now know very well that more than half the geological life of this planet, it was inhibited by bacteria only. Species develop and become extinct.. and life forms are constantly changing on this planet. These life forms do not arrive from anywhere.. and please note that these are not humans only. These changes take place internally on this planet. You may not agree with evolution as according to you there is no conclusive evidence of this theory... Ok.. I can accept your logic.. it may be possible that the life forms are developed by some mechanism other than evolution.. but we can say with almost certainty that these life forms are changing, developing, becoming extinct on this planet constantly.. and on geological time scale none of the species have existed forever on this planet..

[quote]
Some people see this as trying to make the Qur'an in to a science text book ... that is not the case ... we are showing to ourselves that Qur'an stands the test of time - it remains relevant in all ages and cannot be proven false.

For example humans thought that the sun went around the Earth, the verse that states the sun is in a fixed course makes sense to this understanding, then later we said that the Earth goes around the sun so we said the meaning was from the viewers perspective, next we learnt that the sun is travelling around our galaxy and then realise again that the verse is better than any description because "having a fixed course" both omits the information that pins down which course we are talking about - perception or actual around galaxy or perhaps another or a combination of them and yet it provides enough information to be meaningful. This is not only perfect for our needs but when viewed scientifically i.e. linguistically the Qur'an cannot be faulted. Much of the Qur'an is in this way ...

The problem in the video I have is that they have taken the Bible - it's the easy target - I would like them to take the same approach with the Qur'an.
[/quote]

I do not understand why on one hand you agree that Quran is not a book of science.. on the other you still insist to learn sciences from it. Our problem is that we are discouraged to think with an open mind and resist any reform. That's how we are conditioned from the childhood.

I do not believe that the same God who has given us brains discourages us to use it.

Just look around yourself. Humans are becoming more intelligent by every passing day. Even in one's life time the intelligence grows.. to say life forms are not changing and remain constant is a simple denial of very simple observations around you. Scriptures are guidance books for spirituality and morals.. period. Once you understand this fact.. you will understand the standards of morality established by these scriptures will remain constant forever thus the books will remain valid forever. Once you start learning sciences from these books which are not meant for it.... you will start all sort of twisting of facts.. meanings.. to suit your agenda. The best way is to learn sciences from scientific sources and learn morality and spirituality from scriptures.

[quote]
I think where we differ is that you will readily accept a scientific theory if it is supported in the community without much evidence and I on the other hand take reservation to any theory unless it has testable evidence. Both of us agree that religion and science are separate albeit in subtly different ways ... No scientific law, theory or otherwise established fact can be both "true" and in contradiction with the Qur'an - not literally not metaphorically. I don't think you accept that about the Qur'an - may be I am wrong about what you think.
[/QUOTE]

Evolution is not supported by irrefutable evidence.. true.
Because we do not have a chronological record of the fossils due to geological changes and long periods on geological time scale.
But it doesn't mean the life forms have not changed on this planets. This is a fact we know beyond a shadow of doubt.
We also know for sure that these changes have occurred on our planet internally..
May be it is not because of evolution, may be it is because of some other factor we do not understand.
We have a limited capacity as human beings.. we have only five senses to comprehend things around us.
The possibility of the existence of more senses which we do not possess is also a big possibility.
I don't think that scriptures are against the possibility of evolution being the reason behind these changes, and I have shown you from the example cited above (which you gave). God has created the Scriptures.. but God has also created the laws of nature which are very exact and precise. When we observe the universe around us, we can very well see that God operates through these laws of nature and not through miracles. If he has created the hardware around us, he has also created the software to run it. Scriptures do not give you an exact account of this hardware and software.. it was never the purpose of these scriptures. For centuries the humans have understood reading these scriptures that earth is flat, and universe is geocentric. When it was proven that earth is not flat and universe is not geocentric, the literal religious have performed every kind of intellectual dishonesty to prove that the scriptures were previously misunderstood. As the science will progress, the literal religious will continue this dishonest practice.

For the sake of sanity of these scriptures, we should stop treating them as science guidance books. These scriptures are God's gift to humankind. We should stop this dishonesty with them..

442

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?

Evolution is still a theory and has not been proven yet and Islam and humanity has nothing to do with evolution

443

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?

Peace yazdi

When it comes to scriptue we must go by the rules we cannot use apologetics to arrive at our conclusions. Your first point was that by taking the Qur'an literally I would deny the science, but by taking science you would deny the wisdom, you would have chosen the temporal over the eternal and selected the interpretation based on your own feelings and level of knowledge rather than by a rule that you can extrude where it makes allegorical interpretation valid for that particular verse, and so on. For example without arguing about the composition of clay and the composition of humans - by taking the approach that these are different hence we are not the same is denying the ability of Allah (SWT) to make us from clay. I believe when it comes to Allah (SWT) He can make gold out of helium or from nothing for that matter. Science does not work here. In fact your reasoning when you use the term evolution conforms more to the idea that you are apologetically making the Qur'an compatible with contemporary science. A science that is flawed outside the reasons presented in the Qur'an. If I was attempting to make the Qur'an a science text book I would indeed try to make it take the form of the dominant scientific opinion - which happens to be evolution at this moment in time.

Rather I have not resigned myself to any one interpretation ... Clay in water settles low therefore we are made in the form of the low ... i.e. the earth is below our feet and we die and get buried in it. Also, the scientific composition of earth is a mixture of clay of organic matter - it could be that our linguistic interpretation of the verse is wrong - perhaps it is that clay is what is left behind when our composition is extracted from earth/mud ??? And when you look at the data it shows this to be true ... Mud/Earth contains humus and clay and silt the carbon present in the world is concentrated in organic matter and interestingly the two most common elements that are not gaseous in natural conditions are aluminium and silicon both are on the whole unfavourable for life yet are more abundant than carbon. By the way Amino Acids may make up proteins and DNA but nitrogen contained in them is so small in quantity compared to other elements it is clear that amino acids themselves are not equal to the full make up of humans. Water for example being Oxygen and Hydrogen amongst the highest. For me there is still a hidden secret in the term "clay" and that we were taken from it and it goes beyond the loose terminology that you have used regarding any form of symbolism ...

The other point I would like to pick up on ... is about evolution ... there is another pattern in evolution that is as yet unexplained ... it is the pattern that when a new form of species comes about according to the fossil record the parent species (or similar species) dies out very quickly ... according to the record it is as if one species has replaced another ... which in evolutionary terms happens within a battering of an eye-lid. When Allah (SWT) says in the Qur'an regarding nations (of people) that He replaces nations with new ones, for me there is no difference to the kingdoms of man and the kingdom of animals in this regard - i.e. this is the mechanism by which animals are replaced ... now is this evolutionary or otherwise I can't say ... but my focus remains with Allah (SWT) and the Hikmah in that condition.

The point about creatures changing - I totally agree but this phenomenon was discovered before evolution ... You see evolution borrows ideas from established science. Natural Selection is a repeatable experiment and it can be done in our lifetime and tested on many creatures ... the problem is that different phenotypes are said to become different genotypes purely because their appearance is so varied in a number of generation gaps. I find this hard to agree with. I mean we have lots of creatures such as flies or others that can reproduce in short times and then can we not detect evolution in them? Can we not set up an experiment to test evolution with such creatures? I'm sure experiments have been done but they just don't get published - because it goes against the political position.

Your next point is that humans are (allegedly) becoming more intelligent ... this is complete nonesense !!! Just because of technology and the arrival of record keeping and research development it is not a culture that we learn from where others left off ... we build on what they learnt without having to go through the same hurdles and barriers ... and when there is a breakthrough it gets built on ... The fact that we have develoepd computers to do things faster for us it does not mean that we have become more intelligent ... it is like saying that since we can fly we have now become more like birds. Our intelligence is the same - without doubt those minds of Newton and older such as Al-Khwarizmi were around today they would learn what we know and faster and then build on that too ... Rather you need to resign to the idea that great minds appear in every age and help us make breakthroughs that essentially benefit humanity by giving us a baseline to work from ... I can do mathematics that is probably more advanced than the likes of what Archimedes was doing
however I'm not saying that I'm more intelligent than him ... it's just that the material that is established can be learnt whislt he still had many hudles to overcome and openings to find.

I like your statements that I have put in red, but the one in blue I can't say either way ... unless I have studied the context of the verses that refer to our creation in order to say clearly if there are meant literally or not then I cannot say anything.

My last point about what you say regarding religious people being dishonest about scripture ... rather I would say that they have been accused of following an idea that was not established. The idea that the world is flat did not come from scripture it came from people - scripture says things that is compatible with that mindset but at the same time when more knowledge it learned about the nature of the thing in question you will see that the language in the Qur'an does not need to change to accommodate that new understanding of the entity. For example - the sun and moon are in their own path ... in the sky they do both have their own paths one is slower than the other ... it is hence acceptable later when we learnt that the sun and moon should be understood differently again the words of the Qur'an were still applicable - the Sun does revolve around it' own axis and the moon orbits the Earth ...

Now more pragmatically none of these are said to follow an orbit - but paths ... and this is more true than the idea of orbit ... orbit means that there is a circle - but in fact no orbit or stars or planets is a circle ... the moon circles, it's own axis, the earth's and the sun's which means it is a complicated spiral sinusoidal path but furthermore the sun is belting around the galaxy which means the moon is carried in that path too ... it will hence never complete a circle in that sense ... and neither will the sun ... yet we use certain terms to help us build models and by saying the sun and moon around the earth it is true in the context of the observer looking at the sky ... Now this is not science - this is how a holy book should be viewed - with precious regard and with a view that it cannot be faulted.

444

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?

Brother,

Which rules are you talking about. I showed you different versions of interpretation from Dr. Israr to Zakir Naik, and most of Islamic clergymen having positions in between these extreme versions. First of Islam is the only religion with no concept of formal clergy. It's us the followers who have turned Islam in cults following personalities. These clergymen have turned us in to sheep following the herds without using the brain.

As far as I am concerned I do not follow any person. I just read different opinions and support the ideas instead of supporting the personalities.

The advancement of science amongst 1.6 billion muslims is dismal. I wanted to send you a paper through a pm but it was too long and pm message has a restriction 7500 words. If you are interested please send me your email address by pm to enable me send this well researched paper which will give you the status of the advancement of sciences amongst muslims and the causes for such a dismal situation. The bottom line is if all the muslim scientist vanish from the face of earth today, the world scientific community will barely notice. Our attitude towards learning, and to question critically are the main reasons for this backwardness..

[quote]
Your first point was that by taking the Qur'an literally I would deny the science, but by taking science you would deny the wisdom, you would have chosen the temporal over the eternal and selected the interpretation based on your own feelings and level of knowledge rather than by a rule that you can extrude where it makes allegorical interpretation valid for that particular verse, and so on. For example without arguing about the composition of clay and the composition of humans - by taking the approach that these are different hence we are not the same is denying the ability of Allah (SWT) to make us from clay. I believe when it comes to Allah (SWT) He can make gold out of helium or from nothing for that matter. Science does not work here. In fact your reasoning when you use the term evolution conforms more to the idea that you are apologetically making the Qur'an compatible with contemporary science. A science that is flawed outside the reasons presented in the Qur'an. If I was attempting to make the Qur'an a science text book I would indeed try to make it take the form of the dominant scientific opinion - which happens to be evolution at this moment in time.

Rather I have not resigned myself to any one interpretation ... Clay in water settles low therefore we are made in the form of the low ... i.e. the earth is below our feet and we die and get buried in it. Also, the scientific composition of earth is a mixture of clay of organic matter - it could be that our linguistic interpretation of the verse is wrong - perhaps it is that clay is what is left behind when our composition is extracted from earth/mud ??? And when you look at the data it shows this to be true ... Mud/Earth contains humus and clay and silt the carbon present in the world is concentrated in organic matter and interestingly the two most common elements that are not gaseous in natural conditions are aluminium and silicon both are on the whole unfavourable for life yet are more abundant than carbon. By the way Amino Acids may make up proteins and DNA but nitrogen contained in them is so small in quantity compared to other elements it is clear that amino acids themselves are not equal to the full make up of humans. Water for example being Oxygen and Hydrogen amongst the highest. For me there is still a hidden secret in the term "clay" and that we were taken from it and it goes beyond the loose terminology that you have used regarding any form of symbolism ...
[/quote]

There is nothing contained in physical existence of life forms which suggests that they have arrived from somewhere. All the elements contained in life forms are domestically found on this planet in abundance.

Having said that there is a possibility that there is something (can be the spirit) which actually does arrive from somewhere, which we can not comprehend with our five senses.

Without going in to a scientific debate with you on the subject I will ask you just one simple question and would like to have if possible a simple answer from you. I am not able to understand your position on the matter.. sometime you fully agree that scriptures are not books of sciences.. and then you start these science theories from scripture. If you agree that these scriptures are not science books, why do you start these science debates from the scriptures?

[quote]
The other point I would like to pick up on ... is about evolution ... there is another pattern in evolution that is as yet unexplained ... it is the pattern that when a new form of species comes about according to the fossil record the parent species (or similar species) dies out very quickly ... according to the record it is as if one species has replaced another ... which in evolutionary terms happens within a battering of an eye-lid. When Allah (SWT) says in the Qur'an regarding nations (of people) that He replaces nations with new ones, for me there is no difference to the kingdoms of man and the kingdom of animals in this regard - i.e. this is the mechanism by which animals are replaced ... now is this evolutionary or otherwise I can't say ... but my focus remains with Allah (SWT) and the Hikmah in that condition.
[/quote]

These are mere speculations.. Neither does the species vanish overnight.. neither do I think Allah is trying to explain you that the animal kingdoms vanish like that/or are replaced in jiffy like you are suggesting. (remember my position is I do not believe there is any science in scriptures)..

[quote]
The point about creatures changing - I totally agree but this phenomenon was discovered before evolution ... You see evolution borrows ideas from established science. Natural Selection is a repeatable experiment and it can be done in our lifetime and tested on many creatures ... the problem is that different phenotypes are said to become different genotypes purely because their appearance is so varied in a number of generation gaps. I find this hard to agree with. I mean we have lots of creatures such as flies or others that can reproduce in short times and then can we not detect evolution in them? Can we not set up an experiment to test evolution with such creatures? I'm sure experiments have been done but they just don't get published - because it goes against the political position.
[/quote]

I don't think you fully understand the concept of evolution. It is not something you can do in a lab in few hours..

[quote]
Your next point is that humans are (allegedly) becoming more intelligent ... this is complete nonesense !!! Just because of technology and the arrival of record keeping and research development it is not a culture that we learn from where others left off ... we build on what they learnt without having to go through the same hurdles and barriers ... and when there is a breakthrough it gets built on ... The fact that we have develoepd computers to do things faster for us it does not mean that we have become more intelligent ... it is like saying that since we can fly we have now become more like birds. Our intelligence is the same - without doubt those minds of Newton and older such as Al-Khwarizmi were around today they would learn what we know and faster and then build on that too ... Rather you need to resign to the idea that great minds appear in every age and help us make breakthroughs that essentially benefit humanity by giving us a baseline to work from ... I can do mathematics that is probably more advanced than the likes of what Archimedes was doing
however I'm not saying that I'm more intelligent than him ... it's just that the material that is established can be learnt whislt he still had many hudles to overcome and openings to find.
[/quote]

Again I don't think you fully understand the concept of evolution. A few hundred years or 2/3000 years is like a nano second in your life compared on geological time scale. This natural selection is a very slow process.. and takes millions/billions of years to execute. Most of the life forms on this planet are still microbes.. but these microbes are also not the same ones which populated the planet some 3 billion years ago when life started here.

[quote]
I like your statements that I have put in red, but the one in blue I can't say either way ... unless I have studied the context of the verses that refer to our creation in order to say clearly if there are meant literally or not then I cannot say anything.

My last point about what you say regarding religious people being dishonest about scripture ... rather I would say that they have been accused of following an idea that was not established. The idea that the world is flat did not come from scripture it came from people - scripture says things that is compatible with that mindset but at the same time when more knowledge it learned about the nature of the thing in question you will see that the language in the Qur'an does not need to change to accommodate that new understanding of the entity. For example - the sun and moon are in their own path ... in the sky they do both have their own paths one is slower than the other ... it is hence acceptable later when we learnt that the sun and moon should be understood differently again the words of the Qur'an were still applicable - the Sun does revolve around it' own axis and the moon orbits the Earth ...

Now more pragmatically none of these are said to follow an orbit - but paths ... and this is more true than the idea of orbit ... orbit means that there is a circle - but in fact no orbit or stars or planets is a circle ... the moon circles, it's own axis, the earth's and the sun's which means it is a complicated spiral sinusoidal path but furthermore the sun is belting around the galaxy which means the moon is carried in that path too ... it will hence never complete a circle in that sense ... and neither will the sun ... yet we use certain terms to help us build models and by saying the sun and moon around the earth it is true in the context of the observer looking at the sky ... Now this is not science - this is how a holy book should be viewed - with precious regard and with a view that it cannot be faulted.
[/QUOTE]

When I say that some of the religious people are dishonest about the scriptures.. if they don't understand anything they would try to twist the words and invent explanations. They have the answer for everything, and if they don't have the answer they would create one.

Some of these people find even cure for diseases from the scriptures.

You are totally misunderstanding what I am trying to say. By no means I am trying to find faults in the scriptures.. I am rather trying to keep them out of these unnecessary discussions which may lead to their criticism, and people may get a chance to criticize them.

I have never seen a scientific discovery made from any of the scriptures.. nor do I think they were meant for this purpose. Scriptures have not contributed in the past to the scientific advancement of human kind.. and be assured they will not in future also..

Having said that, I don't think scriptures are against any critical thinking in scientific or social terms. It's the closed minded followers who try to drag these scriptures in every sphere of human behavior.. for which eventually the religion/scriptures are blamed.

As far as evolution is concerned, it's the best possible explanation human beings have thought so far to explain the changes in life forms on this planet. It may be/may be not entirely true.. it has to be found out through scientific advancement.. Scriptures are not meant to explain evolution, nor they will help you in any way to find out what brings these changes in life form on this planet..

445

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?

Peace yazdi

I'm not interested in having a political debate with you ... I can ... but it does not serve the purpose of this thread ... I'm also not interested in the advancement of science or the lack of it ... I'm fully aware of that - I am a committee member of an organisation that is set-up to address the issue of scientific research by Muslims and in an Islamic context ... other than serving other things we are focussed on bringing a change in research but with a caveat that it helps us learn more about life, Allah and how to help humanity in all good things ... so I don't need to be converted.

Regarding my knowledge in evolution - I don't have to go into that again you seem to have the same reservations that others have had either you have not read my responses or you have not given them any regard - I know evolution is intended to occur over millenia I also understand that the claims are that it cannot be done in a lab ... however - I'm questioning this ability - There is every chance to persuade evolution to occur quickly (if it is true) all we do is obtain living organisms that have fast life cycles and subject them to artificially altered conditions ... afterall that is the premise by which evolution is said to occur ...

The emboldened part and other things you have said show that you do not consider Al-Qur'an Al-Majid to be anything other than a book ...

Then you want the scriptures to reveal science for you ... it does not work like that - scripture confirms knowledge about the world it does not reveal it. You know all the right things and at times you say the right things ... but quite frankly my best guess is that you are confused ...

446

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?

^^^

Peace brother Psyah,

You got it spot on.. I am confused..

I don't have everything figured out and I am not ashamed to admit it.. I know my reality that I am just a two legged idiot living on a drop of water in an ocean.. but at least I am aware of my short comings. I am more comfortable with** "questions I can not answer than having answers I can not question; worse indeed is to accept answers which are not answers at all..."**

I don't belong to the club who believe the universe was created ten thousand years ago after the agriculture revolution.. and it is better to be confused than being an "over confident arrogant".. I don't know exactly where I came from.. I am skeptical if I arrived from somewhere or evolved from some other species.. and I am perfectly comfortable with this..

Regarding scriptures and science it is largely a political/social discussion because there is hardly any science in scriptures. Unless you let your imagination really go wild.. like you have done in the following example:

[quote]
When Allah (SWT) says in the Qur'an regarding nations (of people) that He replaces nations with new ones, for me there is no difference to the kingdoms of man and the kingdom of animals in this regard - i.e. this is the mechanism by which animals are replaced ... now is this evolutionary or otherwise I can't say ... but my focus remains with Allah (SWT) and the Hikmah in that condition.
[/quote]

Scriptures have not contributed to any scientific advancement ever.. there is hardly any science in them.. and this view point is shared by some Islamic scholars of high repute like Moududi, Dr. Israr, and Ghamdi.. You seemed to agree with this view point in your earlier posts as well..

Later you started contradicting your own self by trying to take out science from Quran.. which must be read in metaphorical/spiritual sense rather than literal scientific sense as per my understanding which is endorsed by some Islamic scholars as well.

Let me make a very simple challenge to you.. please give me one example from Quran about science which is not yet discovered by humans.. and you learnt that fact by just reading Quran..???

I believe in God because when I study science, I find precision, accuracy, and harmony in nature.. which indicates to an intelligent designer.. I believe in morals/social laws I have learnt from my parents.. and these sets of morals come largely from the religion we follow..

On the other hand I don't believe the same intelligent designer who has given me some intelligence discourages me to question/think critically. He has not created me a sheep who needs a shepherd. Therefore I don't follow principles given by some monk/priest/mullah blindly. I listen to opinions from different people and accept/reject these opinions on individual basis according to my own intelligence..

Thanks for acknowledging that I know some right things and sometimes even say them.. I never claim anything more than that.. I am the first to admit that I haven't got all figured out.. I don't know everything, and whatever I say is not always right..

Did it ever occur to you that there may be a possibility of all the above mentioned things being valid for you as well my friend..

Anyway it's a pleasure discussing with you on this topic.. bottom line is it's important to find out what is right than who is right..

447

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?

errrm HIV/AIDS?

Psyah bro, ur chasing ur tail now really bro, peace :smiley:

Yazdi: MARRY ME!!! :wub:

448

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?

Peace bro yazdi

Ok so here we are … you admit to being confused, but is this meant in jest? Are you being patronising? Allahu’aalim. Perhaps I should not have said it like that … rather I have a good opinion of your ability to reason that I said what I said and I didn’t mean to offend you.

Like you I too do not have everything figured out and I am not ashamed to admit it. And my reality is worse than yours i.e. these two legs are not even mine that I lay claim to them, and I am indeed aware of my short comings that is the reason why I resign to the Qur’an because I believe it to be from Allah (SWT) science is our interpretation of the universe. It makes more sense to resign to scripture than to science because of the very reason that you say – i.e. that humans have short comings.

You say that you are more comfortable with** “questions you can not answer than having answers you can not question; worse indeed is to accept answers which are not answers at all…” ****seeing that we are in the philosophy forum let’s analyse this statement. **

For me comfort is to be content – and to be in a state of contentment is where the internal condition is satisfied that it no longer “questions” the outward condition for “why” – that “why” is a movement inside the person that shifts us away from comfort and hence I question the logic in your statement above. It sounds good to the uninitiated and I say this without any arrogance and Allah (SWT) is my witness. The reason why we seek answers is to satisfy that need of “why”. The reason why science came about was so we could answer these questions. To be given an explanation that we do notquestion is not the same as being given an explanation that we can notquestion. We can carry on questioning but a time comes when we resign and accept. You have done this with evolution I have not done this … yet. I accept that Allah (SWT) sent man to the Earth, how that is to be interpreted well I’m still waiting for an explanation that I am in agreement with … until then I do not ask the question … not that I can not ask it … the condition of the believer is not that he does not ask questions out of fear, but that he has no need to ask those questions – he is satisfied.

You say that you don’t belong to the club who believe the universe was created ten thousand years ago after the agriculture revolution.. and it is better to be confused than being an “over confident arrogant”.. First of all I do not belong to that club either and the emboldened statement here is presented as a false dichotomy. There is a third choice - one does not have to be over confident arrogant or confused and nothing else … I would rather not be confused and that state is beautiful indeed, perhaps that feeling comes off as arrogance, but it is not – it is assurance and confidence – but it is not confidence in myself – it is indeed confidence in Allah (SWT) …For sure All Praises are for Him.

You say that you don’t know exactly where you came from, that you are skeptical if you arrived from somewhere or evolved from some other species… but you are perfectly comfortable with this. I say I came from my mother’s womb, that Allah (SWT) breathed life in to me when I was starting off … In fact I would say that a part of me was in existence before my mother herself was born, because as you may know when a female child is developing in the womb of her mother before she is born albeit fully developed all of her ova have been created, there is no more to come after a point pre-natal growth of the female. I think my statement without any arrogance is an exact thing it does not need further explanation.

Next you mention that the topic of scriptures and science it is largely a political/social discussion because there is hardly any science in scriptures. For me science is an extension of scripture. It is the documented work relating to our findings from scripture and that is what the organisation that I am a part of wants to reignite. For example when people read in the Qur’an that the “sun” and the “moon” are signs of Allah (SWT), Muslims without the science were already using the sun and moon to tell the time of day and time of month respectively. But then further study led to the timetabling system, calendars and navigation etc all stemmed from this …
You said that my imagination was going wild with the idea of nations being replaced and animals being no exception to this – so let me illustrate my point when it comes to dinosaurs …

http://www.lifestudiesonline.com/dinosaurs/extinct.htm

The removal of these creatures – note not all of the living creatures died, but the dinosaurs were selectively killed off by forces of natural cataclysmic events, only the last theory given is a gradual process and even that is not gradual enough for the dinosaurs to have “evolved” to survive. My point being even science confirms through archaeological evidence that creatures are eliminated usually by chance events with high impact – to me this is the signature of Allah (SWT). To a non-believer it may be just a black swan event basing it on statistical theory, which is the parent basis for evolution as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory,

Foremost I also agree with you that scriptures have not contributed to any scientific advancement, however they have been integral for pointing us in the right direction to make scientific discovery. You say that this is shared with Islamic scholars of high repute like Moududi, Dr. Israr, and Ghamdi. I do still fundamentally agree with this view point, (but apologies I do not consider Ghamdi a scholar of high repute).

However you then say that I contradicted myself by trying to take out science from Quran.
I however did not do this, when scripture says something I accept it, I then embark on finding out what it means. For example the pattern in the Qur’an is when there is a parable and metaphoric term it is usually given to us for spiritual guidance and character building purposes, however literal statements are also given to demonstrate, prophetic knowledge of the Qur’an and actual knowledge that only Allah (SWT) could know, but with the added dimension that it will not unveil itself until we stumble across or research it. For that reason literal statements in the Qur’an cannot teach us science because their scientific insight is hidden until we make discovery. So when I analyse the basis of God sending humans to the Earth in a metaphoric way I look for the spiritual guidance in such a notion, since it evades me then I conclude that it must be a literal statement designed as evidence of its authenticity, but we will only come by this knowledge through research or perhaps never come by it at all. At least in our personal lifetimes we might not – so I simply accept it.

You challenge to me that “I should give you one example from Quran about science which is not yet discovered by humans” is a false challenge, because the basis of knowledge in the Qur’an is always found after the fact. Scientific knowledge engenders people to reflect on the verses – it does not work the other way round. If it did this then technological progress and scientific research would not be required. I have never claimed that the Qur’an reveals scientific truths before we discovered them through our own research. We look to the verses of the Qur’an about embryology and we take it as science, but it took an embryologist to see that and consequently he became Muslim, but prior to that Muslims just read those verses accepting them for whatever they meant. Now, I spotted something in the Qur’an some years back that made me say “SubhanAllah” – I’m not saying that my interpretation is concrete, but I am saying that it made me confirmed in that the Qur’an is from Allah (SWT) it was a personal thing. However I looked at those verses with a scientific hat on and what I saw were verses that seemed to have knowledge of the fact. The verses I am talking about are in Surah Naziat – the first few, where I believe although they speak about different types of angels doing the bidding of Allah (SWT) they have great parallels with the forces, strong, weak, electric, magnetic, and gravitation. You see the purpose of the “science in scripture” is not for discovery, but to confirm to those who have knowledge in any field that there is a Being above them and superior to them, it encourages those people to accept the guidance of the Qur’an.

Just like you I believe in God because when I study science, I find precision, accuracy, and harmony in nature. This does indicate an intelligent designer. I too believe in morals/social laws I have learnt from my parents.

You wrote: On the other hand I don’t believe the same intelligent designer who has given me some intelligence discourages me to question/think critically.

Without going in to detail the aqeedah of Ahl-us-Sunnah-wal-Jammah does require us to avoid being critical in areas where we obviously have no real knowledge nor can ever obtain it.

With regards to following the opinions of scholars I do follow them somewhat out of “trust” I do not call it blind, because although I cannot possibly know more than a scholar and hence could not decide for myself which scholar is true and which is not without having to do the research myself, I do however see whose character is trustworthy and accept him. Since this is the Sunnah of our sahabah (RA) with RasoolAllah (SAW). They saw in him “good character” to accept his words. They did not ask him for proof or try to intellectually confront him, rather this was the practice of the deniers.

Apart from that I accept that I have not been as eloquent as I should be and you have obviously picked up on my weakness of discourse and for that I apologise. I do admit that I can be wrong and often I am … in fact I changed my whole Islamic outlook in the process of some 7 years as a result of questioning myself. You can see for yourself an audit trail in my responses on Gupshup … With that said, I believe this subject to me is more than just another subject – it is a bone of contention and it is something that I have wished would be addressed through a research programme by PhD students.

To end … I cannot appease the atheistic scientific community if they concede that evolution is not as factual as they have led us to believe, because they will ask me for an alternative theory and that I am unable to provide … all I want is for the hype of evolution to be reduced and the systematic teaching of it as fact to be stopped. They are serving their needs to discourage religion and want it to seem outdated and that for me presents a big philosophical problem.

Please forgive me for my faults …

449

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?

Peace kali billi

LOL … surely it’s billies who have tails (not me) … with regards to yazdi … lay off the catnip …

450

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?

@psyah

Thanks for taking time to have this discussion. It was indeed a learning experience for me. My respect for you has enhanced and your ability to make a point is remarkable. I must admit your level of knowledge and your study is at a very high level. Although we don't agree on certain points, but it was never the intention of this discussion.. i.e. to convert to each other.

I was never offended by your remark.. in fact it gave me an opportunity to make some points which otherwise I would have been reluctant to make.. at least with you.. so thanks for giving me that opportunity..

Just one last clarification... when I said I am skeptical of where I came from.. I didn't mean in literal sense myself.. this remark was meant to be read as I as a human being..!!!

I also apologize if any of my remarks did hurt you.. it was never the intention..

P.S. It was one of the best discussions I ever had on GS.. Although I don't participate in religious forum but always read your posts with a lot of interest and learn a lot from them..

451

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?

@kb

LOL..

452

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?

Peace yazdi

May Allah (SWT) reward you and touche to your post above ...

453

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?

Those who do not accept that species have evolved from other species should explain the emergence of various species at different times in history.
Did they just appear fully formed? from where? how?
What actually happened in history?

454

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?

http://www.islamictube.com/watch/222ab4bcac1af0412e2a/Islamic-Stance-on-the-Evolution-Theory-Sh--Abu-Usamah
Listen To this Guys

455

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?

http://www.mashahd.net/video/69b64e5fe565434461c9 Part1

http://www.mashahd.net/video/aa7cb77fda9c2d502bf3 Part 2

http://www.mashahd.net/video/d379e459cb5b0f51cf0f Part 3

http://www.mashahd.net/video/50b193d598086eaaf71e Part 4

http://www.mashahd.net/video/83c4241e972810b25d59 Part 5

http://www.mashahd.net/video/83c4241e972810b25d59 Part 6

http://www.mashahd.net/video/c3114ab971cb3b90182b Part 7
No Brainer Lecture By Sheikh Yusuf Estes listen to this he has exposed this cartoon theory

456

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?

I dont think any thread I have ever opened has ever run this long. Kinda of monster thats taken on its own roots.

Perosnaly, still not convinced that there is any legitimate reason to doubt evolution, and I certainly dont find anything in Islam that tells me it should be discarded.

Seems that those who oppose it for whatever reason have their own thoughts jumbled. At the end of the day, believe it if you like or dont. But evolution science, or whatever you call it isnt going anywhere.

457

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?


I don't follow you. Islam says that Allah created Man with clay (i think). Evolution theory holds that man and chimp shared the same ancestors. Unless you consider Drawin to be a islam prophet, i cant see any converaance between islam and human evolution.

458

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?

Trying to run with the big boys?

Don't quit your day job fella!

459

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?


What did I say wrong there? Instead of a general retort, use whatever little you have in your head to answer intelligently.

460

Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?

Yes, you were basically writing out nonsense up there.

Evolution has moved on leaps and bounds from Darwin's time. Why is brought up again and again whenever there is a debate between evolution/non-evolution? Stop hanging on to Darwin. Evolution did not start with Darwin nor did it stop when he died. There's countless studies and visible examples of evolution all around us.

Because Darwin isn't a prophet, his theories do not hold true? Err okay... How can you believe in little bits and pieces yet ignore the bigger picture? That's called picking and choosing / being a hypocrite.

Might as well stop believing in genetics and modern biology. Say what?

P.S. Why don't you read this thread first? You came in here, posted something that's been posted a hundred times in this thread. It still won't make sense.