Creationism vs Theistic Evolution vs Evolution

[Camilla]

I'm curious as to which of these you believe hold the most merit.

[جوري]

It's not about belief nor should it be!
It's about what is demonstrable and factual!
We've many threads on thus title it's best to go through them than start the same topic again!

Best,

[White Rose]

I am afraid thats going to lead no where for each individual has a different perspective.

[Hulk]

Hi Ms Camilla you can try searching the forums but here's two existing threads you can check out.

http://www.islamicboard.com/general/...evolution.html
http://www.islamicboard.com/health-s...evolution.html

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[greenhill]

:embarrass Sorry have to look up the meanings... I only know evolution.... mmmm I know that it does not explain humans... Can't poll imsad :D

[glo]

Theistic evolution for me.

Theistic evolution or evolutionary creation is a concept that asserts that classical religious teachings about God are compatible with the modern scientific understanding about biological evolution. In short, theistic evolutionists believe that there is a God, that God is the creator of the material universe and (by consequence) all life within, and that biological evolution is simply a natural process within that creation. Evolution, according to this view, is simply a tool that God employed to develop human life.

[Camilla]

I am afraid thats going to lead no where for each individual has a different perspective.

That's where you and I disagree. I love hearing other people's perspective, so long as its respectful. Everyone has differing opinions, true. But I don't think it's a waste of time to hear them. You can learn a lot of insight from other people this way.

[Camilla]

Hi Ms Camilla you can try searching the forums but here's two existing threads you can check out.

There's been a poll?
I understand that this topic has even discussed, by I'm also interested in the statistics of it.

[جوري]

I understand that this topic has even discussed, by I'm also interested in the statistics of it.

How scientific do you expect these stats. to be?

best,

[Camilla]

How scientific do you expect these stats. to be?

best,

Very, I plan on compiling a manifesto.

Look, I'm not trying to publish anything. I'd just like to have a general idea.

[جوري]

Very, I plan on compiling a manifesto.

Look, I'm not trying to publish anything. I'd just like to have a general idea.

It doesn't matter to me personally either way- you brought up statistics, I rather think it is the natural Q to follow suit.
good luck with your quest!

best,

[Hulk]

There's been a poll?
I understand that this topic has even discussed, by I'm also interested in the statistics of it.

I am not sure how such a poll would be of benefit to you especially since one wouldn't know just how knowledgable the voters are in the mentioned subjects. Before any discussion or "poll" is to take place shouldn't there be an understanding for everyone as to what the definitions of each term is? I for one had no idea there was such thing as "theistic evolution".

If the option wasn't there and if some were to pick "Evolution" would it then assume that the person was an atheist?

I think if you're interested in the subject it would benefit you to take some time to try and see what the Islamic understanding of the concept is(since this is a muslim forum).

[جوري]

If the option wasn't there and if some were to pick "Evolution" would it then assume that the person was an atheist?

To begin with we don't know what her definition of evolution is? micro, macro? I dislike immensely these catch all terms.. but it isn't my thread and I didn't vote so I don't care either way..

:w:

[Camilla]

Evolution is evolution to me.
Macro or Micro, Its all evolution on a different scale.

As for the definitions (in a nutshell):

Creationism: Is the belief that all life on earth was created by Allah/God.

Theistic Evolution: Is the theory that Allah's/God's creation was designed in a way so that it would naturally evolve.

Evolution: is the idea of a change in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes asmutation, natural selection, and genetic drift.


And, I will make sure to try an educate myself more on this. My intent is not to insult anyone. I don't mean to come off that way, and if I do: I sincerely apologize.
I was under the impression that the Muslim creation story was, somewhat, similar to the Christian one.

[Hulk]

No I'm sure you have no ill intent and I believe no one here does (God willing). It's an online medium so we really can't actually sense the tone of people's voices so it's easy to misunderstand sometimes.

Personally I still don't get why there has to be such a thing as "theistic evolution". Let's say for example the topic at hand is hypertrophy and not evolution.

Creationism: Is the belief that all life on earth is created by God.
Theistic Hypertrophy: Is the theory that God's creation was designed in a way so that it would naturally grow.
Hypertrophy: The enlargement of an organ or tissue from the increase in size of its cells.

First we see that by the definition of "evolution" or "hypertrophy(my example)", it is not something that is necessarily at odds with belief in a Creator. Belief in how nature works whether it be how rain is formed, how electricity works, how our human bodies work, etc does not negate the belief that there is a Creator. So even if one were to subscribe to the belief that evolution is true it doesn't negate that one might believe in the Creator unless this person believes that the living thing that evolves came from nothing(has no Creator).

By this reasoning I feel there is no need for there to be "theistic evolution". As one can then stick "theistic" to just about any other process to point out that the person who believes in the process also believes in the Creator.

I hope you understand what I'm trying to express.

[Snel]

Islam says that Adam and Eve came to this world miraculously, not through natural selection. However, I don't know what's the case about animals existence but I highly doubt it has anything to do with evolution. It could be the case, since I haven't found anything that contradicts that.

Saying that the human-being has evolved from another creature is surely incompatible with Islam.

Evolution is a way for the kafir to justify his/her disbelief, we should never rely on it if it contradicts the Quran and the Sunnah.

[Camilla]

No I'm sure you have no ill intent and I believe no one here does (God willing). It's an online medium so we really can't actually sense the tone of people's voices so it's easy to misunderstand sometimes.

Personally I still don't get why there has to be such a thing as "theistic evolution". Let's say for example the topic at hand is hypertrophy and not evolution.

Creationism: Is the belief that all life on earth is created by God.
Theistic Hypertrophy: Is the theory that God's creation was designed in a way so that it would naturally grow.
Hypertrophy: The enlargement of an organ or tissue from the increase in size of its cells.

First we see that by the definition of "evolution" or "hypertrophy(my example)", it is not something that is necessarily at odds with belief in a Creator. Belief in how nature works whether it be how rain is formed, how electricity works, how our human bodies work, etc does not negate the belief that there is a Creator. So even if one were to subscribe to the belief that evolution is true it doesn't negate that one might believe in the Creator unless this person believes that the living thing that evolves came from nothing(has no Creator).

By this reasoning I feel there is no need for there to be "theistic evolution". As one can then stick "theistic" to just about any other process to point out that the person who believes in the process also believes in the Creator.

I hope you understand what I'm trying to express.

I think i do.
I wanted to use evolution as an athiest choice.
And use theistic evolution to support faith and science. Just not taken word for word from a religious script.
But, the woman above me is correct: my options are too vague and too open do interpretation and each persons opinion is very different.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Camilla;

I voted Creationism; every creature created according to its kind.

I have a limited acceptance of evolution, if a white man lives in Africa, his skin will become darker, if he has children with a black woman the skin colour and some features might change slightly.

Single cell life three and a half billion years ago to fish to mammals to man with all the missing links is just a big no

In the spirit of searching for God the creator of all that is seen and unseen

Eric

[MustafaMc]

Single cell life three and a half billion years ago to fish to mammals to man with all the missing links is just a big no

In the spirit of searching for God the creator of all that is seen and unseen

I agree completely that naturalistic evolution is inadequate to explain the origin of the species. However, the exact mechanism through which God created the species is unknown to us. If we can use our own individual origin as an analogy for the creation of the human species we can come to some understanding. Our individual development began with the development of sperm inside our father and an egg inside our mother. The sperm and egg came from a reductionary division of a gametic mother cell that began with the duplication of genetic information through pairing of 4 different nucleic acids that were formed in a specific manner from the elements carbon, oxygen, hydrogen and nitrogen. The sperm and egg mother cells went through specific divisions and changes to give rise to sperm and egg that have no reason for existing apart from leaving the body and becoming united with the corresponding gamete of the opposite sex. The union of the sperm and an egg forms a most elemental single cellular zygote that undergoes replicative divisions and positionally controlled cellular differentiation to form specific organs and tissues from the information that exists within the undifferentiated zygote. Amazingly, the sperm, egg, zygote and young embryo of many animal species look incredibly similar. Despite the apparent similarities in early morphology and even in genetic information the embryos go on the develop into vastly different species.

Now the origin of the original pair of each species is up for debate, but the simplest means is that they were assembled intact in a manner beyond our comprehension. Otherwise, God could have directed the changes in a manner that seems evolutionary like the development of a zygote into an infant and then into an adult, but at a much faster pace than ToE allows and not through haphazard chance.

If one thinks about it, all animals are built with the same basic elemental building blocks which are themselves built of electrons, protons and neutrons which are basically just negative, positive or neutral electrical charges. The amazing thing to me is how all of this came into existence from nothing. If one thinks only a little bit, he would know that order does not arise from disorder without the exertion of an external will with the power to create. The Theory of Evolution leaves my intellect completely and utterly unsatisfied. I am much more comfortable with Intelligent Design defined as:

"Intelligent design refers to a scientific research program as well as a community of scientists, philosophers and other scholars who seek evidence of design in nature. The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection. Through the study and analysis of a system's components, a design theorist is able to determine whether various natural structures are the product of chance, natural law, intelligent design, or some combination thereof. Such research is conducted by observing the types of information produced when intelligent agents act. Scientists then seek to find objects which have those same types of informational properties which we commonly know come from intelligence. Intelligent design has applied these scientific methods to detect design in irreducibly complex biological structures, the complex and specified information content in DNA, the life-sustaining physical architecture of the universe, and the geologically rapid origin of biological diversity in the fossil record during the Cambrian explosion approximately 530 million years ago."

However, ID is not the same as creationism.

"The theory of intelligent design is simply an effort to empirically detect whether the "apparent design" in nature acknowledged by virtually all biologists is genuine design (the product of an intelligent cause) or is simply the product of an undirected process such as natural selection acting on random variations. Creationism typically starts with a religious text and tries to see how the findings of science can be reconciled to it. Intelligent design starts with the empirical evidence of nature and seeks to ascertain what inferences can be drawn from that evidence. Unlike creationism, the scientific theory of intelligent design does not claim that modern biology can identify whether the intelligent cause detected through science is supernatural."

http://www.intelligentdesign.org/whatisid.php

Personally, I am a creationist for I can see no other 'intelligent cause' capable of designing biological systems and species of life except that being is itself uncreated and superior to the creation. I equate the 'intelligent cause' with the One God and none else.

[Holly3278]

I believe in Theistic Evolution. I simply believe that God used the process of evolution to create all living creatures, including man.

[Hulk]

Today I learned that before darwin talked about evolution, there was Al Jahiz(a muslim) about 1000 years earlier.

-------------
Al-Jāhiz was one of the first Muslim biologists to develop a theory on evolution.

He wrote on the effects of the environment on the likelihood of an animal to survive, and he first described the struggle for existence. Al-Jāḥiẓ was also the first to discuss food chains, and was also an early adherent of environmental determinism, arguing that the environment can determine the physical characteristics of the inhabitants of a certain community and that the origins of different human skin colors is the result of the environment.^[5][6] His Book of Animals states,

Animals engage in a struggle for existence; for resources, to avoid being eaten and to breed. Environmental factors influence organisms to develop new characteristics to ensure survival, thus transforming into new species. Animals that survive to breed can pass on their successful characteristics to offspring.^[7][8]

According to physicist Jim Al-Khalili, his book was a major influence on Arab scholars of the 11th to 14th centuries, and the Latin translations of their work in turn became known toLinnaeus, Buffon and Lamarck.^[7]

The historian Dr. Mehmet Bayrakdar testifies: "Indeed, Darwin and his precursors took up the theory of Al Jahiz as the base for the essentiality of their evolutionary theories and they formulated it in a more scientific way in the context of eighteenth and nineteenth centuries development of science". The German Orientalist and historian Friedrich Dieterici in his "Der Darwinismus im X und XIX Jahhundert", together with E. Wiedemann in his "Darwinistishes bei Gahiz" and other European thinkers have proved even before that that there is a great similarity between Charles Darwin and Al Jahiz, except that Al Jahiz does not reject creationism, and treats evolution in a highly delicate manner that proves his theological views, that God is the causer of causes, and He changes things in the manner He wishes.

Al Jahiz also rejects the idea that humans are descendants of other species, the fact which would leave us with the hypothesis proposed by Belhamidi Hadjer, that the fossils dating back to before Neolithic period, or the creation of Homo sapiens sapiens probably belonged to the species of human beings before they had the human mind, and that Homo sapiens sapiens are the newly created humans after having been created with the mind.
--------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Jahi...y_of_Evolution

[IbnAbdulHakim]

i believe that man kind has been created by God.


Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: "Most certainly, people from my Ummah will consume liquor which they will describe with some other name. Over their heads will be playing musical instruments and singing girls. Allah will cause the earth to swallow them, and from among them He will transform into apes and pigs." (Ibn Maajah)

im not saying thus is where apes came from but it wouldnt surprise me tbh


baaically i believe whatever i find in quran and sunnah without hesitation

[Good brother]

Today I learned that before darwin talked about evolution, there was Al Jahiz(a muslim) about 1000 years earlier.

-------------
Al-Jāhiz was one of the first Muslim biologists to develop a theory on evolution.

He wrote on the effects of the environment on the likelihood of an animal to survive, and he first described the struggle for existence. Al-Jāḥiẓ was also the first to discuss food chains, and was also an early adherent of environmental determinism, arguing that the environment can determine the physical characteristics of the inhabitants of a certain community and that the origins of different human skin colors is the result of the environment.^[5][6] His Book of Animals states,

Animals engage in a struggle for existence; for resources, to avoid being eaten and to breed. Environmental factors influence organisms to develop new characteristics to ensure survival, thus transforming into new species. Animals that survive to breed can pass on their successful characteristics to offspring.^[7][8]

According to physicist Jim Al-Khalili, his book was a major influence on Arab scholars of the 11th to 14th centuries, and the Latin translations of their work in turn became known toLinnaeus, Buffon and Lamarck.^[7]

--------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Jahi...y_of_Evolution

Assalam alaikum

wiki's source is jim & the quote is fake. This is the page jim is talking about
http://archive.org/stream/hdhkitbala.../n132/mode/2up

The source of this confusion was someone who wrote an article online & had a thought:
"I think al-Maskh is a kind of ape; see Vol. IV, p. 24."

(wiki is wiki :) )

[Good brother]

i believe that man kind has been created by God.


Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: "Most certainly, people from my Ummah will consume liquor which they will describe with some other name. Over their heads will be playing musical instruments and singing girls. Allah will cause the earth to swallow them, and from among them He will transform into apes and pigs." (Ibn Maajah)

im not saying thus is where apes came from but it wouldnt surprise me tbh


baaically i believe whatever i find in quran and sunnah without hesitation

Assalam alaikum

Sufyan Ath-Thawri narrated that Ibn Mas`ud said, "Allah's Messenger was asked if the current monkeys and swine were those whom Allah transformed. He said

,قَالَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ لَمْ يُهْلِكْ قَوْمًا أَوْ يُعَذِّبْ قَوْمًا فَيَجْعَلَ لَهُمْ نَسْلاً وَإِنَّ الْقِرَدَةَ وَالْخَنَازِيرَ كَانُوا قَبْلَ ذَلِكَ ‏"

(Allah never destroyed a people by transforming them and letting them making offspring or descendants for them. The monkeys and swine existed before that.)''
http://sunnah.com/urn/264400

Which means: Allah hath cursed some humans and transformed them into apes and swine.
But, They didn't have Offsprings.

[IbnAbdulHakim]

^ jazakAllah khair bro

[Karl]

I suppose I am a conservative. For eons of time people believed in Gods or God created everything and then just recently "evolution" came along and all sorts of other theories like Cataclysmic mutation, Micro and Macro Cosmos and all sorts of other dreamed up stuff like the seeds of life drift through space like how coconuts can drift in the ocean and when they land on a beach a tree will grow. All sorts of mysteries out there that we will probably never know. Once I believed in utter chaos, but after years of deep thought I could see the puzzles and order of things. An order that cannot be explained by "evolution". The complexities of life the universe and everything could never evolve from the chaos as far as I can reason.

[Hulk]

Assalam alaikum

wiki's source is jim & the quote is fake. This is the page jim is talking about
http://archive.org/stream/hdhkitbala.../n132/mode/2up

The source of this confusion was someone who wrote an article online & had a thought:
"I think al-Maskh is a kind of ape; see Vol. IV, p. 24."

(wiki is wiki )

Wa alaykumsalaam, it appears there is much more than what the citations on wiki has to offer. I will find out more when time permits inshaaAllah, thank you good brother :D

Also I think it's worth reflecting how apes are considered "related" to human beings and how certain pig organs can be transplanted into humans and still function.

[MustafaMc]

I believe in Theistic Evolution. I simply believe that God used the process of evolution to create all living creatures, including man.

What is your perspective on evolution being undirected with natural selection acting on random genetic variation vs. it being directed and controlled by God?

[GuestFellow]

I hope you understand what I'm trying to express.

I don't. Anyway...

I find these topics confusing. I mean I'm no scientist. I'm not very knowledge in science so it's very hard for lay people to decide.

[Karl]

Wa alaykumsalaam, it appears there is much more than what the citations on wiki has to offer. I will find out more when time permits inshaaAllah, thank you good brother :D

Also I think it's worth reflecting how apes are considered "related" to human beings and how certain pig organs can be transplanted into humans and still function.

All life is "related" on this planet, the genetic blueprint starts with a single cell and it's DNA. To simplify it is like all life is made from a Leggo set. All shapes and sizes can be made but the fundamental building blocks are the same. Hydrogen, Carbon, Nitrogen and Oxygen. All life if heated enough goes back to it's Carbon base. We are made from what is common on this planet with a little bit that is not so common. As mammals we are genetically closer to apes and pigs than non mammals spiders etc.

[Trumble]

What is your perspective on evolution being undirected with natural selection acting on random genetic variation vs. it being directed and controlled by God?

If I may, surely one's perspective on that is solely determined by whether you believe in God or not? If there is a God, any evolution that occurs must be directed and controlled by Him as He must have initiated the process (or the processes which led to the process), and having perfect knowledge nothing could be 'random'. Evolution is not 'random' at all (any more than spinning a roulette wheel is), it just appears that way because there are so many interrelating factors involved it's practically impossible to even observe them, let alone track them back millions of years through time. The only being who could, and must necessarily have, that capacity is God.

I don't believe in God, of course, but I never could understand a preference for 'Creationism' over 'Theistic Evolution' by those who do. Creationism makes no sense at all to me even from that perspective.

I ask you, what could be more elegant than a process lasting over billions of years that, once started with perfect knowledge of where it will end up (which is exactly where God would want it to end up) can just be left alone to get on with it? Isn't that far more likely than God having to constantly intervene from time to time to make a few species extinct here, create a few new ones there? That just makes no sense at all, unless God has a habitual need to keep busy. The only intervention that is consistent is that which introduces something completely ontologically different - the obvious (and only) example being a non-material substance that simply falls outside the scope of biological evolution. That would appear perfectly consistent with a view that God created man, as doing so involved equipping him with a non-material consciousness and/or soul, without indulging in the frequent intervention in biological evolution required by Creationism.

I would be good to distinguish 'theistic evolution' from 'intelligent design'. The first is a perfectly respectable position in religious philosophy. The second is totally discredited pseudo-scientific twaddle. They are most certainly not the same thing. ID is actually even more philosophically incoherent than Creationism, with 'intervention' being replaced by tinkering instead. Nothing as impressive as new species, but instead a bacterial flagellum here or the odd coagulation cascade there.. why?! The necessary implication is that God couldn't design an evolutionary system that worked without further intervention, necessitating a less perfect solution. Which is, of course, incompatible with God's omnipotence.

[MustafaMc]

Evolution is not 'random' at all (any more than spinning a roulette wheel is), it just appears that way because there are so many interrelating factors involved it's practically impossible to even observe them, let alone track them back millions of years through time.

For evolution to not be random would mean that it was pre-programmed toward a certain result and programming implies a Programmer who can be equated with the Creator. My understanding is that evolution is a naturalistic process that does not allow for the involvement of an external, unobservable element that is ultimately in control which is the primary conflict with ID which does although ID does not require that the 'intelligent designer' be a supernatural 'God' or look to religious texts for explanation. Evolution relies upon the generation of genetic variation through random mutations, reproductive isolation and natural selection for the development of higher, more complex organisms from more basic 'Common Ancestors'. ToE adherents don't acknowledge that genetic mutation is a destructive process, yet they rely upon it as the most basic source for genetic variation for natural selection to act upon to 'build' new species. It is like using a RPG to transform a log cabin into the Petronas Towers.

The only being who could, and must necessarily have, that capacity is God.
I don't believe in God, of course, but I never could understand a preference for 'Creationism' over 'Theistic Evolution' by those who do.

I don't have a preference of one over the other, but I see 'Theistic Evolution' as a possibility that the details of our origins could have been through what appears from the outside as 'evolutionary'. The caveat is that from my understanding of biological processes and genetics is that these changes would NEVER have come about without the intimate and precise involvement of a Creator which by default gets us back the 'Creationism' albeit from another route. Neither do I deny that the existing and extinct species of life could have been miraculously formed and life breathed into the seminal parents of each species. Of a necessity I believe that God created ALL species of life and not by creating the process of evolution which I see as woefully inadequate. Rather than to use an inadequate theory, I prefer to not speculate as to the mechanism of our emergence as a species, but rather go back to religious texts for explanation of things metaphysical such as where we came from and where we are going.

[Alamgir]

Asalamu Alaikum

Theistic evolution, but without the monkey to homo sapien bit, and with a high degree of scepticism. That's my stance.

[Ümit]

I support (not believe) in theistic evolution.
Sounds confusing right? let me explain.

1) I believe (and know) in Creationism. Allah has created every living creature himself. It did not develop nor evolved on its own by chance.

2) modern science point more and more in the direction of evolution. this does not yet make evolution a fact, but it makes it highly plausible.

So, considering 1) and 2), Theistic evolution is a good possibility...but as long as the evidence for it is yet missing, I can only support it...I cannot believe it to be true.

If you try to explain some unknown phenomenon, you try to think out theories how that may be possible. you do not neccessarily believe those theories to be true...but it just might explain this strange occurence. so you test and investigate. if it fails, then the theory was false and you will start over looking for another explanation.


So "believing" in this context is "knowing it is true / exists" I believe in Allah
not like, "I believe I saw your keys on your desk yesterday" (with a certain amount of uncertainty)

[czgibson]

Greetings,

Evolution, obviously. All the evidence points towards it and none points towards the alternatives.

Peace

[sister herb]

I believe that Allah has created evolution. Because of all scientific evidencies, I can´t deny the existence of evolution and because Allah has created the whole universe, evolution is just part of His miracles.

[Zafran]

Evolution is just the best explanation we have about apparent and phenomenal world - in the field of Biology.

Islam is about the existential, moral and eschatological truth which is based on revelation and the prophets of God.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Zafran;

Evolution is just the best explanation we have about apparent and phenomenal world - in the field of Biology.

Evolution is a very good theory that explains how life adapts to changes. But I strongly disagree that you can use the ToE to extrapolate back 3.5 to 4 billion years, to show how the complexities of life evolved from single cells. The prophet Adam did not share or have any other species as a common ancestor.

Islam is about the existential, moral and eschatological truth which is based on revelation and the prophets of God.

Amen.

Blessings,
Eric