Originally Posted by mansio

Sometimes I wonder if I am not discussing with children.
The idea of man molded from clay doesn't need to come from God. God is so much smarter than that. Anybody can watch a potter molding a statue. By analogy, in the pagan cultures, that fact gave the idea of a god creating a human being that way.
Man created from clay is a pagan myth borrowed by the Bible and then by the Quran.
It's as simple as that.

One might as well say that if God created mankind, why is there sickness? Why isn't eveything perfect? Why don't things happen according to what we perceive to be as 'common sense'? The fact is, one of the attributes of God is that He is the All-Wise. Therefore we often find things that might not make sense to us, but God, out of His great Wisdom and Knowledge, knows it to be for the best. Who are we to question why God chose a certain substance to create us out of?
You say the pagans got their ideas from watching a potter, please provide evidence.

You still have not answered the question as to how you know which existed first: monotheism or paganism. Therefore how do you KNOW that the Bible and the Quran "borrowed" ideas? Let's be fair about this and provide proof to backup our statements shall we, don't just throw statements blindly into the air and expect everyone to believe them. Its no wonder you don't take any answers when you can't even provide solid evidence yourself.

Originally Posted by mansio

Most Christians know it's a pagan myth but they take it in a figurative meaning, symbolically. So they are not in the least embarrassed in their faith by the discoveries of science.

What exactly are you saying here, that most of the world's Christians don't believe that God made humans? That's a rather big assumption and if they don't, I doubt they can call themselves Christian. Maybe you could elaborate on this and possibly show some evidence.

Originally Posted by mansio

Some on this forum believe Adam actually existed, not by their own discoveries, but because they are told so by the Quran. So that obliges them to distort reality to make it match with the Quran.

Since when has anyone distorted reality to make it match with the Quran?? Science and Islam do not contradict each other, so perhaps you could provide examples proving otherwise?

Originally Posted by mansio

As man emerged about two millions years ago when did Adam live ? If you want to narrow the question down to Homo Sapiens, who emerged between half a million and a quarter million years, do it.

Muslims do not get too bogged down with unnecessary questions like the exact year in which the first man on earth lived. God has made it known that He created the first man, and this man came to earth, what more would you like to know? There are even descriptions about his height if you are that interested, and about his family etc etc. but you cannot expect modern day technology to reveal some remains from millions of years ago, and use that as an argument that Adam did not exist.
It has already been mentioned that:

Originally Posted by Preacher

If something is not found that does not constitutes it never existed.

And please do remember to think about the following questions:

Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl

The fact that some idea/theology is old does not make it any less valid. That's a logical fallacy. Remember, islam claims to be the original teachings since the beginning of time. Wouldn't it seem reasonable that the early Prophets of Islam spoke of creation from clay?

Secondly, you called the notion a 'pagan myth', both of which are unsubstatiated claims. Can you show me conclusive evidence that the theory of creation from clay has pagan origins? Can you show me how it is a myth?

Originally Posted by root

I noticed too how quickly the thread was detroyed when we got to specifics regarding Adam.

I agree with this too, and it is called "primatephobia".

I think what's happened here is that certain people were asked for evidence and they chose to ignore that. Then they asked the same questions as though nobody answered them. The thread is still going but people are just trying to make false accusations and choose to take and leave what they like.

I think there is also such a thing as 'faithophobia' though it might not be a registered word yet.

Originally Posted by root

Ah, faith...... I agree you cannot argue faith. If someone has faith that the sky is actually black then nothing and no ammount of evidence will sway his mind even if that meant he could no longer see what was in front of his eyes

Strange you say that because it can go both ways... Some people claim they will only believe until they see God in front of their very eyes. I ask you, if He is the One to create our entire universe, the One whom mansio believes is so "smart" that making us out of clay seems unbelievable, why should He come down every century or so to prove His existence, when everything around us already points to His existence??
There is evidence everywhere around us yet some are blind to it, and God even mentions them in His Noble Book:

'Verily, those who disbelieve, it is the same to them whether you (O Muhammad (peace be upon him)) warn them or do not warn them, they will not believe.' [2:6]

God addresses the Children of Israel:
'And (remember) when you said: "O Musa (Moses)! We shall never believe in you until we see Allaah plainly." But you were seized with a thunderbolt (lightning) while you were looking.
Then we raised you up after your death, so that you might be grateful.' [2:55-56]

'And even if We had sent down to them the angels and the dead had spoken to them and We had brought together all things before them, they would not believe unless Allah pleases, but most of them are ignorant.' [6:111]

'And those who do not hope for Our meeting, say: Why have not angels been sent down upon us, or (why) do we not see our Lord? Now certainly they are too proud of themselves and have revolted in great revolt.' [25:21]

'And certainly We have explained for men in this Quran every kind of similitude, but most men do not consent to aught but denying.
And they say: We will by no means believe in you (O Muhammad (peace be upon him)) until you cause a fountain to gush forth from the earth for us.
Or you should have a garden of palms and grapes in the midst of which you should cause rivers to flow forth, gushing out.
Or you should cause the heaven to come down upon us in pieces as you think, or bring Allah and the angels face to face (with us).
Or you should have a house of gold, or you should ascend into heaven, and we will not believe in your ascending until you bring down to us a book which we may read. Say: Glory be to my Lord; am I aught but a mortal apostle?' [17:89-93]

Thankz for the post...indeed was a long one but just read part 1 yet...
got answers of my questions.....
:applaud: :applaud: :applaud:

Faith by itself doesn't mean anything.
If it is faith in something real, then it is legitimate.
If it is faith in something unreal, that has never existed, then it's called gullibility.

Mansio,
Its interesting that you call certain beliefs "fairy tales" or "pagan myths", yet the Qur'an rsponded to such arguments 1400 years ago.

25:4-6 But the disbelievers say: "Naught is this but a lie which he has forged, and others have helped him at it." In truth it is they who have put forward an iniquity and a falsehood.
And they say: "Tales of the ancients, which he has caused to be written: and they are dictated before him morning and evening."
Say: "The (Qur'an) was sent down by Him who knows the mysteries in the heavens and the earth: verily He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."

And furthermore:
83:10-14. Woe, that Day, to those that deny-Those that deny the Day of Judgment. And none can deny it but the Transgressor beyond bounds the Sinner! When Our Signs are rehearsed to him, he says, "Tales of the ancients!" By no means! but on their hearts is the stain of the (ill) which they do!

16:24 When it is said to them, "What is it that your Lord has revealed?" they say, "Tales of the ancients!"

I find it miraculous that in whatever debate I have, the Qur'an explicity answers the claims of my opponents for me. SubhanAllah.

Originally Posted by mansio

Sometimes I wonder if I am not discussing with children.

I asked you a question and you respond with condescending remarks. Let's try to have a productive dialogue, please.

The idea of man molded from clay doesn't need to come from God. God is so much smarter than that.

The logic doesn't follow here. God informs us that He has created human beings from clay, yet you dismiss God's words on the basis of what? Creation from clay is a sign for human beings, since to us clay seems so lifeless and inconceivable that we could be created from it, yet God has truly designed us in the best form from this substance, a testimony to His power and wisdom.
http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/eng...FatwaID=104053

Besides, I don't even know how you can remotely use this as an argument against Islam, since the nature of this clay was unknown to you.

This is what we know of earthly clay:

Clay is a generic term for an aggregate of hydrous silicate particles less than 4 ?m (micrometres) in diameter. Clay consists of a variety of phyllosilicate minerals rich in silicon and aluminium oxides and hydroxides which include variable amounts of structural water. Clays are generally formed by the chemical weathering of silicate-bearing rocks by carbonic acid, but some are formed by hydrothermal activity. Clays are distinguished from other small particles present in soils such as silt by their small size, flake or layered shape, affinity for water and high plasticity index.
There are three main groups of clays: kaolinite-serpentine, illite, and smectite. Altogether, there are about thirty different types of "pure" clays in these categories, but most natural clays are mixtures of these different types, as well as other weathered minerals.
Montmorillonite, with a chemical formula of (Na,Ca)0.33(Al,Mg)2Si4O10(OH)2·nH2O, is typically formed as a weathering product of low silica rocks. Montmorillonite is a member of the smectite group and a major component of bentonite.
Clays sintered in fire were the first ceramic, and remain one of the cheapest to produce and most widely used materials even in the present day. Bricks, cooking pots, art objects, dishware, spark plug tips, and even musical instruments such as the ocarina are all made with clay. Clay is also used in many industrial processes, such as paper making, concrete production, and chemical filtering.
Varve (or varved clay) is clay with visible annual layers, formed by seasonal differences in erosion and organic content. This type of deposit is common in former glacial lakes from the ice age.
Quick clay is a unique type of marine clay, indigenous to the glaciated terrains of Norway, Canada, and Sweden. It is a highly sensitive clay, prone to liquefaction which has been involved in several deadly landslides.

Anybody can watch a potter molding a statue. By analogy, in the pagan cultures, that fact gave the idea of a god creating a human being that way.

What you say is not historically correct, because in ancient cultures, the creation of clay was not accepted as the true account of man's creation.

In Norse Mythology, the first humans were created from logs by Odin and his brothers.

In the Ancient Aryan myths, we find the belief that the first man and woman grew out of plants and bushes.

In the Babylonian myths, Marduk uses the blood of Kingu to create man.

In the Inca mythology, Con Tiqui fashoned human beings out of giant rocks.

In the Mayan mythology, human beings are created by the Heart-of-sky from Maize-corn dough.

In the Navajo nation, humans were believed to be created from the ears of corn.

In the Celtic mythology, human beings are the descendents of the gods.

Amonst Egyptian Mythology, we find the belief that men and women formed from the tears of the god, Khepera.

Is this enough evidence? Quite clearly, your claim that ancient civilizations naturally believed in creation from clay as they saw pottery is comnpletely unjustified. The account of creation from clay spread under the Abrahamic faiths. Therefore, your claim that it is a "pagan myth" is refuted.

I agree that you will find some ancient cultures that believed in creation from clay, but this is clearly the result of divine revelation, and not analogies from pottery.

Man created from clay is a pagan myth borrowed by the Bible and then by the Quran.
It's as simple as that.

You can keep repeating the same claims, but that doesn't make them anymore credible.

Most Christians know it's a pagan myth but they take it in a figurative meaning, symbolically. So they are not in the least embarrassed in their faith by the discoveries of science.

It would seem to me that they are embarassed, and that's why they need to take the account "symbolically".

Some on this forum believe Adam actually existed, not by their own discoveries, but because they are told so by the Quran.

The sources for knowledge amongst human beings are many, but the most authoritative source is divine revelation. Once a scripture has been accepted as divine revelation, it holds the most weight as evidence.

So that obliges them to distort reality to make it match with the Quran.

Which reality has been distorted?

As man emerged about two millions years ago when did Adam live ? If you want to narrow the question down to Homo Sapiens, who emerged between half a million and a quarter million years, do it.

You can set a date for Adam whenever you wish, in light of scientific discoveries. It doesn't amke a difference.

According to our current understanding of evolution, there were several "bottle-necks" in the history of our species, where scientists have identified an extremely low number of individuals in the population. They suggest that at these points in our timeline, a great number of species died out, and the species procreated from these indivduals. Adam (pbuh) may have been aty any of those bottle-necks.

Originally Posted by mansio

Faith by itself doesn't mean anything.
If it is faith in something real, then it is legitimate.
If it is faith in something unreal, that has never existed, then it's called gullibility.

Define reality and existence after reading the works of Baudrillard. Reality is only what our conciousness makes it - and we don't even know what that really is yet.

And last but most certainly not least; a topping to finish off our response:

Originally Posted by mansio

I come to the crux of the matter : do you believe that Adam was an ape-like biped that slowly became intelligent, slowly acquired speech and slowly became religious ? "Slowly" can mean several thousand years.

Many times in the Qur'an can a person find the story of Adam. One only has to pick up the book and read.

[2.29]He it is Who created for you all that is in the earth, and He directed Himself to the heaven, so He made them complete seven heavens, and He knows all things.

[2.30] And when your Lord said to the angels, I am going to place in the earth a khalif, they said: What! wilt Thou place in it such as shall make mischief in it and shed blood, and we celebrate Thy praise and extol Thy holiness? He said: Surely I know what you do not know.

[2.31] And He taught Adam all the names, then presented them to the angels; then He said: Tell me the names of those if you are right.
[2.32] They said: Glory be to Thee! we have no knowledge but that which Thou hast taught us; surely Thou art the Knowing, the Wise.

[2.33] He said: O Adam! inform them of their names. Then when he had informed them of their names, He said: Did I not say to you that I surely know what is ghaib in the heavens and the earth and (that) I know what you manifest and what you hide?

[2.34] And when We said to the angels: Make obeisance to Adam they did obeisance, but Iblis (did it not). He refused and he was proud, and he was one of the unbelievers.

[2.35] And We said: O Adam! Dwell you and your wife in the garden and eat from it a plenteous (food) wherever you wish and do not approach this tree, for then you will be of the unjust.

[2.36] But the Shaitan made them both fall from it, and caused them to depart from that (state) in which they were; and We said: Get forth, some of you being the enemies of others, and there is for you in the earth an abode and a provision for a time.

[2.37] Then Adam received (some) words from his Lord, so He turned to him mercifully; surely He is Oft-returning (to mercy), the Merciful.
[2.38] We said: Go forth from this (state) all; so surely there will come to you a guidance from Me, then whoever follows My guidance, no fear shall come upon them, nor shall they grieve.

[2.39] And (as to) those who disbelieve in and reject My communications, they are the inmates of the fire, in it they shall abide.


Please note:
Allaah taught Adam the names of everything, which answers your question as to how Adam acquired intelligence.

Threads split.

Some of my points were being left unanswered. We will deal with the origins of the story of creation from clay, as well as it's scientific authenticity, in this thread.

Some of my points were being left unanswered. We will deal with the origins of the story of creation from clay, as well as it's scientific authenticity, in this thread.

I can accept this, for I too have lost my way when the thread split. "creation from clay" or "evolution from clay". which is it to be............... for the point of the discussion.

I am not sure why some people; especially "atheists and evolutionists" parrot too much of science, scientific and scientific evidence for everything, like science is the panacea of every question and human problems.

If that is true than, why there is a term in scientific vocabulary as "Paranormal" and why it has often used as an answer or conclusion by the scientists and experts etc?

Let us look in the American Heritage Dictionary what is the meaning of the word "Paranormal?"

par·a·nor·mal (p²r”…-nôr“m…l) adj. Beyond the range of normal experience or scientific explanation: such paranormal phenomena as telepathy; a medium's paranormal powers. --par”a·nor·mal“i·ty (-nôr-m²l“¹-t¶) n. --par”a·nor“mal·ly adv.

Now we are often bombard with the non-sense that science has found the cure of this and that, true; but what is the relevance of finding the cure of TB or any other disease with belief, in unknown and unseen or existence of God?

What about all those failures where science or scientific community conceded the defeat by concluding an issue or question as "Paranormal?" Doesn't it prove something, hello?

Despite of all its success (that no one is denying) science or scientific community have hopelessly failed to tell us what is the origin/s of life or how the life began?

The irony of the issue of evolution is that, it has two such distinct aspects to it. One is its theory, and the other one is its cause. The theory of evolution is said to be a certainty, whereas the cause of evolution is as yet unknown.

How it is possible for a concept to be believed with such forceful certainty when the causes are unknown?

It is like evolutionists are saying that, the concept of evolution is a theory for which arguments have yet to be discovered.

Can you see the obvious absurdity, here?

Regards

I am not sure why some people; especially "atheists and evolutionists" parrot too much of science, scientific and scientific evidence for everything, like science is the panacea of every question and human problems.

I don't see how this is relavent.

If that is true than, why there is a term in scientific vocabulary as "Paranormal" and why it has often used as an answer or conclusion by the scientists and experts etc?

Some would say the paranormal is not science but it is a complex issue probably worthy of it's own thread.

Now we are often bombard with the non-sense that science has found the cure of this and that, true; but what is the relevance of finding the cure of TB or any other disease with belief, in unknown and unseen or existence of God?

I would ask you to expand but I fail to see how it is relevant to this thread. Are you saying one can use faith to protect ones-self from disease?

Despite of all its success (that no one is denying) science or scientific community have hopelessly failed to tell us what is the origin/s of life or how the life began?

Please let me come back to this shortly within this thread as it is relavent

How it is possible for a concept to be believed with such forceful certainty when the causes are unknown?

Again I will post tomorrow as above

It is like evolutionists are saying that, the concept of evolution is a theory for which arguments have yet to be discovered.

as above

Can you see the obvious absurdity, here?

No, I don't at least

Hi root,

Originally Posted by root

I can accept this, for I too have lost my way when the thread split. "creation from clay" or "evolution from clay". which is it to be............... for the point of the discussion.

Let's first deal with the origins of the story of creation from clay. Mansio made the claim that it was a "pagan myth" and that all ancient cultures believed that. I responded to that claim by citing the theories of creation in several ancient mythologies.

The other point we can discuss in this thread is the validity of belief in human's creation from clay.

If you wish to discuss evolution, let's leave that for the thread on creation vs. evolution.

Originally Posted by root

I don't see how this is relavent.



Some would say the paranormal is not science but it is a complex issue probably worthy of it's own thread.



I would ask you to expand but I fail to see how it is relevant to this thread. Are you saying one can use faith to protect ones-self from disease?



Please let me come back to this shortly within this thread as it is relavent



Again I will post tomorrow as above



as above



No, I don't at least

Hello root

Let me clear few things to set the record straight. First of all I don’t believe that my post was off topic or off target or in contrast of the thread title. I believe it was right on target and of the heart of the argument, despite of the title of thread. However, you have stated as such, to get even with me, since I said something to this effect to you, on other thread.

Having said that, I must assert that I have no desire to further any dialogue on the subject matter, I think I finish debating these issues over decade ago. This is a Muslim forum and my presence here is to defuse and refute the anti-Islam attacks, or to the least distortions. Therefore, what I posted was food for thought for my fellow Muslims.

Regards

Let's first deal with the origins of the story of creation from clay. Mansio made the claim that it was a "pagan myth" and that all ancient cultures believed that. I responded to that claim by citing the theories of creation in several ancient mythologies.

The other point we can discuss in this thread is the validity of belief in human's creation from clay.

If you wish to discuss evolution, let's leave that for the thread on creation vs. evolution.

I included creation/evolution from clay in my post (most recent post) of which is the definitive understanding of how life started on this planet here:

http://www.islamicboard.com/showthre...ed=1#post47355

I somehow find it hard how evolution could have created humans.Its not that I came from a Muslim background or I am a Muslim.

Now that the sea is fully oxygenated (for those bothered to read the above link) it now moved into the atmosphere. Again this fully supports Evolutions claim that early complex (multi-celled) organisms existed in the sea a few million years before land, and life was able to move from sea to land firstly as single bacteriums then the complex multi-celled species of the sea could move to the surface of our planet.......... The rest is evolution continued.

everyhting evolved from water Allah said so.What are you stating anyway?I am a little lost. so many threads ...its confusing......