/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Ibn Khaldun’s Evolution Theory



anatolian
02-25-2018, 08:30 AM
Salam. Since the subject is heated frequently here and everywhere I thought it is a good idea to discuss its Islamic roots if there is any. I personally believe that evolution is real and it perfectly explains the creation. All the confusion comes from some misinterpretations of Quran and older scriptures. Ibn Khaldun was the first evolutionist in the history of Islam and most probably Darwin was influenced by him. He thought the creation of man does not contradict with the idea of men coming from apes.

https://muslims4uk.com/2013/01/19/ib...evolution/amp/

“It should be known that we – May God guide you and us – notice that this world with all the created things in it has a certain order and solid construction. It shows nexuses between causes and things caused, combinations of some parts of creation with others, and transformations of some existent things into others, in a pattern that is both remarkable and endless.

(…)

One should then look at the world of creation. It started out from the minerals and progressed, in an ingenious, gradual manner, to plants and animals. The last stage of minerals is connected with the first stage of plants, such as herbs and seedless plants. The last stage of plants, such as palms and vines, is connected with the first stage of animals, such as snails and shellfish which have only the power of touch. The word “connection” with regard to these created things means that the last stage of each group is fully prepared to become the first stage of the next group.

The animal world then widens, its species become numerous, and, in a gradual process of creation, it finally leads to man, who is able to think and to reflect. The higher stage of man is reached from the world of the monkeys, in which both sagacity and perception are found, but which has not reached the stage of actual reflection and thinking. At this point we come to the first stage of man after (the world of monkeys). This is as far as our (physical) observation extends.

Now, in the various worlds we find manifold influences. In the world of sensual perception there are certain influences of the motions of the spheres and the elements. In the world of creation there are certain influences of the motions of growth and perception. All this is evidence of the fact that there is something that exercises an influence and is different from the bodily substances. This is something spiritual. It is connected with the created things, because the various worlds must be connected in their existence. This spiritual thing is the soul, which has perception and causes motion.

Above the soul there must exist something else that gives the soul the power of perception and motion, and that is also connected with it. Its essence should be pure perception and absolute intellection. This is the world of the angels. The soul, consequently, must be prepared to exchange humanity for angelicality, in order actually to become part of the angelic species at certain times in the flash of a moment. This happens after the spiritual essence of the soul has become perfect in actuality, as we shall mention later on“
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Misbah-Abd
02-25-2018, 11:40 AM
This is wrong. Our father Adam was created human and didn't evolve from an ape. And Allah Knows Best.
Reply

Mahir Adnan
02-25-2018, 11:52 AM
if you say that,human also have come through evolution, you are wrong.
but if you say,all creatures have come on earth through evolution, but Allah created human separately, then I guess, you are right.
Reply

Good brother
02-25-2018, 01:35 PM
Wa alaikum assalam.
1- Ibn Khaldun believed in Islam and that Adam is the first human as shown in his writings.
2-"Ibn Khaldun was not talking about evolution but the old greek philosophical idea of an order to creation, and this can be shown by his viewpoint placing angels above men and his placing of dark skinned races below light skinned ones in the same way the greeks did.

However even this idea of an order of creation is incorrect according to Islam as it goes directly against the Islamic teaching of peoples race not having any effect upon their deen, that black and white, arab and non arab is equal and the only thing which differentiates us is our piety and good deeds.

Ibn Khaldun was merely placing things in a series of steps to show what he thought were superior or inferior creations and not describing one becoming the other, as by placing the angels above men was he really saying men evolve into angels? A part of his theories that is ignored or left out by evolutionists when referring to him.

Its quite a desperate bit of lying on the part of evolutionists and 'muslims' who support this godless philosophy to try to claim ibn Khaldun as one of their own over this and can be easy disproved but then the evolutionists and those who put their aql before naql share a similar trait of twisting the evidence to support their twisted views and claiming any proof to counter the fact they usually go against the Quran and sunnah."

"the passage from Ibn Khaldun’s Muqaddima, from the section ‘the Meaning of Prophecy’, seems to describe a succession of stages in superiority of one creation to another, without at all implying a physical evolution of one form to the next. His usage of the word ufuq (literally: ‘horizon,’ in some contexts ‘side/edge of the celestial sphere,’ translated (incorrectly?) in the passage as “stage”) is more suggestive of ‘the theory of celestial spheres and emanation’ floating around at that time, and seems to be an extension of that. Medieval philosophers would often discuss prophecy in the context of emanation, again another indication that ibn Khaldun is not talking about evolution."
http://turntoislam.com/community/thr...9/#post-569048

3-Great Chain of Being

"The term denotes three general features of the universe: plenitude, continuity, and gradation. The principle of plenitude states that the universe is “full,” exhibiting the maximal diversity of kinds of existences; everything possible (i.e., not self-contradictory) is actual. The principle of continuity asserts that the universe is composed of an infinite series of forms, each of which shares with its neighbour at least one attribute. According to the principle of linear gradation, this series ranges in hierarchical order from the barest type of existence to the ens perfectissimum, or God.The idea of the chain of being was first systematized by the Neoplatonist Plotinus, though the component concepts were derived from Plato and Aristotle."
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Great-Chain-of-Being
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
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
Alamgir
02-25-2018, 01:59 PM
Asalamu Alaikum

I agree with @Mahir Adnan

No harm in saying all life (other than humans) have evolved from other species, but saying it for humans is a grave sin, and some even count it as an act of kufr/blasphemy.
Reply

czgibson
02-25-2018, 04:01 PM
Greetings,

format_quote Originally Posted by Ibn Shahid
No harm in saying all life (other than humans) have evolved from other species, but saying it for humans is a grave sin, and some even count it as an act of kufr/blasphemy.
If all the available evidence indicated that humans did indeed evolve from apes, would you still regard it as a grave sin to believe it?

Peace
Reply

Mahir Adnan
02-25-2018, 06:10 PM
I don't know why brother @anatolian believe in an imperfect theory.seems that,Muslims in west are facing too much fitna. in my country majority laughs at Darwin. however,that's not the case. truth is Halden law disprove ape to human evolution regarding ibn khaldun- https://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/i...waId&Id=311803

Ibn Khaldoon did not support the theory of evolution - Islam web - English
Ibn Khaldoon did not support the theory of evolution I have a question you say that the theory of evolution is haram but did Ibn khaldun not write a b.....
Reply

AabiruSabeel
02-25-2018, 06:56 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
If all the available evidence indicated that humans did indeed evolve from apes, would you still regard it as a grave sin to believe it?
Yes, because "all the available evidence" can still be incomplete and misleading. Please see this thread to understand how: How science fails to explain complete truth

How science fails to explain complete truth
The truth is what Allah has revealed on the Prophet . And theories and assumptions are what science might tell us. Science can never explain the truth...
Reply

Alamgir
02-25-2018, 07:06 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,



If all the available evidence indicated that humans did indeed evolve from apes, would you still regard it as a grave sin to believe it?

Peace
There is no conclusive evidence, and there never will be. So this is a pointless thought experiment.
Reply

Ümit
02-26-2018, 11:30 AM
There is some confusion here. the word "believing" is being used with different meanings.
Muslims do not believe in evolution in the same way they believe in Allah.
If a Muslim says "I believe in Allah"...then he is saying "I know Allah exists". there is no doubt here.

If a Muslim says "I believe in evolution" then he is saying "there is a great possibility that evolution has been taking place" (with a certain amount of doubt)

no one believes in a theory with centainty. you develop a theory in an attempt to explain the unknown. then you test and investigate. if it turns out false, then you adjust your theory.
this is how science works.

for a long time scientists thought you could add up or distracts speeds in the same direction from each other like Vr = V1 + V2.
this was assumed to be one of the general laws of physics.
Then Einstein came along and proved this was only accurate for speeds much lower than lightspeed.
he then changed this formula into Vr = (V1 + V2) / (1 + (V1V2 / C^2)).

So again, no one believes in an imperfect theory. but science points more and more towards that direction, so it is highly plausible.
There still is Allah in the background controlling the process all the time.

And why would it be kufr to say that humans also evolved from other species? it does not neccessarily imply that Adam as's parents were some other species.
no one is saying miracles are not allowed to happen during evolution.

example: Humans reproduce themselves by giving birth and this requires a male and a female human...but this didn't stop Isa to be born without a father.
does this mean our understanding how human reproduction takes place is wrong?
Reply

AabiruSabeel
02-26-2018, 04:33 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by umie
And why would it be kufr to say that humans also evolved from other species? it does not neccessarily imply that Adam as's parents were some other species.
no one is saying miracles are not allowed to happen during evolution.
It is kufr to say humans evolved from other species, because Allah :swt: Himself says,

[ Allah ] said, "O Iblees, what prevented you from prostrating to that which I created with My hands? Were you arrogant [then], or were you [already] among the haughty?"
[Surah Saad: 75]

Adam :as: was created by Allah Himself and every human being is from his progeny.

It comes in a Hadith,
And people are all the children of Adam, and Adam was [created] from dust. [Tirmidhi]


We don't know about all other species, but certainly, man was created as a man.
Reply

Ümit
02-26-2018, 05:29 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by AabiruSabeel
It is kufr to say humans evolved from other species, because Allah :swt: Himself says,

[ Allah ] said, "O Iblees, what prevented you from prostrating to that which I created with My hands? Were you arrogant [then], or were you [already] among the haughty?"
[Surah Saad: 75]

Adam :as: was created by Allah Himself and every human being is from his progeny.

It comes in a Hadith,
And people are all the children of Adam, and Adam was [created] from dust. [Tirmidhi]


We don't know about all other species, but certainly, man was created as a man.
So this surah and hadeeth you are quoting would not match anymore if humans evolved from other species? Why? Did Allah not create the other species with his hands?
Do other species not go back to dust when they die?
Reply

AabiruSabeel
02-26-2018, 05:51 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by umie
So this surah and hadeeth you are quoting would not match anymore if humans evolved from other species? Why? Did Allah not create the other species with his hands?
Do other species not go back to dust when they die?
Other creatures were created simply by Allah's command, kun fa yakoon, be and they became. It doesn't matter whether they evolved after that into more species or not. All what matters is humans did not evolve from any other specie. The first human, Adam :as:, was created as a man.
Reply

azc
02-26-2018, 07:18 PM
Evolutionists say that people, plants, and animals evolve into completely different things over time. If that's true, we should find an abundance of evidence, transitional species all over the place, and someone in the history of science must have observed this happening. After all, with all the trillions of creatures that exist on this planet, at least one of them should be evolving right now!Interestingly enough, that is a dead end as well. All the fish we find are fish, all the birds we find are birds, all the bats we find are bats, all the people we find are people, and single-celled organisms never reproduce into anything except single-celled organisms. There's no transitional species to be found, and evolution (in the sense of organisms increasing in complexity) is not happening anywhere. In reality, if evolution were true, everything that is or was alive should just be another transitional species, including humans. There would be no point in classifying species, because they all would just be changing into something else continuously. But we find none of that. http://www.muftisays.com/forums/13-a...evolution.html
Reply

czgibson
02-26-2018, 09:09 PM
Greetings,

format_quote Originally Posted by azc
Evolutionists say that people, plants, and animals evolve into completely different things over time. If that's true, we should find an abundance of evidence, transitional species all over the place, and someone in the history of science must have observed this happening.
No individual could directly observe macroevolution happening, because the magnitude of the time involved in the process is too great. However, there is a huge amount of evidence of transitional forms in the fossil record.

Partial list of transitional fossils

Peace
Reply

Zafran
02-27-2018, 04:59 AM
Evolutionary biology is scientific model that gives the best explanation of the apparent and phenomenal world. However no scientific theory can verify miracles because its outside of its domain eg Adam and Jesus pbut.

If a paradigm shift happens then the the whole theory would be replaced just like Newtons laws to Chaos Theory/Einsteins theory of relativity or Geo eccentric to helio centric, Qualitative to the Quantitative etc etc.
Reply

azc
02-27-2018, 08:37 AM
This concept of apeman is flawed.

Can you put these animals in order of evolution..?

Orang utan, gorilla, ape, chimpanzee, monkey, gibbon, atheists

- - - Updated - - -
@czgibson :
Reply

Mahir Adnan
02-27-2018, 01:12 PM
@czgibson , are you sure?? fossil record supports evolution!! Harun Yahya wrote 4 volumes of Atlas of Creation only on fossil record. Dawkins just have pointed out 4 mistakes from 800+ pages. isn't that pathetic? http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20170...pes?ocid=fbert

BBC - Earth - We have still not found the missing link between us and apes
There was once an animal that was an ancestor to both humans and apes. But what was it like?...
Reply

Alamgir
02-27-2018, 04:12 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,



No individual could directly observe macroevolution happening, because the magnitude of the time involved in the process is too great. However, there is a huge amount of evidence of transitional forms in the fossil record.

Partial list of transitional fossils

Peace
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20170...en-us-and-apes

BBC - Earth - We have still not found the missing link between us and apes
There was once an animal that was an ancestor to both humans and apes. But what was it like?...
Reply

czgibson
02-27-2018, 04:19 PM
Greetings,

format_quote Originally Posted by Mahir Adnan
czgibson, are you sure?? fossil record supports evolution!!
Yes. I agree that the fossil record supports evolution.

Harun Yahya wrote 4 volumes of Atlas of Creation only on fossil record. Dawkins just have pointed out 4 mistakes from 800+ pages. isn't that pathetic?
Harun Yahya's work is pathetic, yes. He's a deeply suspicious man who knows very little about biology. One glance at his TV programme (which features numerous women wearing hardly any clothes) ought to convince you that he sets a very bad example for any Muslim.

When I first joined this forum, it was very common for people to present Harun Yahya's arguments in opposition to evolution. After his arguments had been repeatedly destroyed by various members here (both religious people and not), it then became much less common to see his work mentioned for a while. Muslim members seemed to become embarrassed or otherwise reluctant to use his arguments, as the flaws in them had by then become obvious to pretty much everybody.

Peace
Reply

czgibson
02-27-2018, 04:31 PM
Greetings,

format_quote Originally Posted by Ibn Shahid
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20170...en-us-and-apes

BBC - Earth - We have still not found the missing link between us and apes
There was once an animal that was an ancestor to both humans and apes. But what was it like?...
That's twice now that people have posted links to this article. How do you think it helps your case? If you read beyond the title you'll find that it describes various aspects of the debate surrounding the LCA (last common ancestor). At no point does the article suggest that evolution is not true.

Peace
Reply

Good brother
02-27-2018, 04:47 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,



No individual could directly observe macroevolution happening, because the magnitude of the time involved in the process is too great. However, there is a huge amount of evidence of transitional forms in the fossil record.

Partial list of transitional fossils

Peace
Even if we grant that every fossil looks the way it is reconstructed and that sequences demonstrating evolution really do exist, fossils cannot count as evidence for evolution. They can merely be consistent with evolutionary theory (which they aren’t!) — not evidence for the theory.
Why is this so?
No-one can know if any fossil is related. And because of this, we cannot know if one particular fossil evolved from another. If we cannot know that one particular fossil evolved from another, we cannot use them as proof that one fossil evolved from another (aka evolution)!

Now some may say that similarities between organisms determine relationships. In other words, similar organisms are probably related. But this reasoning falls flat. Many similarities exist between the marsupial mouse and the placental mouse.However, evolutionary scientists believe that the placental mouse and the horse are more closely related than the placental mouse and the marsupial mouse. In this instance, and in many others, similarities do not equate to relatedness. The argument from similarity as evidence for relatedness is a dead end.

Moreover many supposed members of your list were found to be absolute hoax. Take these as examples: http://evolutionfactormyth.blogspot....h/label/whales

And because of your very smart observation, we know that : Neo-darwinism is a Speculation; completely half baked, not testable, not falsifiable and not provable.
Reply

Alamgir
02-27-2018, 05:00 PM
http://evolutionfactormyth.blogspot....ion-model.html

Reply

AabiruSabeel
02-27-2018, 08:12 PM
Have a look at some of the previous discussions on this topic linked here:

Index of useful threads

Ex-AtheistMuslims.com - No biological man-made life yet – Science is decades behind..


Also watch this video:


Index of useful threads
This is an index of threads centred mainly around the theme of clarifications about Islam. Let us remember that we must give priority to acquiring sou...
Reply

czgibson
02-27-2018, 08:21 PM
Greetings,

format_quote Originally Posted by Good brother
Even if we grant that every fossil looks the way it is reconstructed and that sequences demonstrating evolution really do exist, fossils cannot count as evidence for evolution. They can merely be consistent with evolutionary theory (which they aren’t!) — not evidence for the theory.
The fossil record provides evidence of transitional forms, as I said. It does not give evidence of direct descent. Until anybody can come up with a better explanatory theory that accounts for the diversity of extant fossils (and the apparent transitional forms) than evolution, then the scientific consensus will remain.

Moreover many supposed members of your list were found to be absolute hoax. Take these as examples: http://evolutionfactormyth.blogspot....h/label/whales
By "many", you mean three. Hoax is a bit strong; these are fossils whose characteristics appear to have been interpreted incorrectly. Why you think this in some way disproves evolution is a bit of a mystery. Scientists are usually pleased to discover that they have got something wrong in the light of new evidence, and they adjust their thinking accordingly. What is the problem here?

Peace
Reply

Mahir Adnan
02-28-2018, 01:23 PM
salam,
Yes. I agree that the fossil record supports evolution.
then why bbc said that, there is lack of evidence ;)

well,let's put Harun yahya aside.though Dawkins ran away from him.however,this link may help
DNA of Human and chimpanzee

DNA of Human and chimpanzee
Atheists claim that chimp and human possess 98% similar DNA. But truth is,there lies a huge difference. Because, calculation of percentage is not accur...
Reply

czgibson
02-28-2018, 04:33 PM
Greetings,

format_quote Originally Posted by Mahir Adnan
salam,
then why bbc said that, there is lack of evidence ;)
Because you don't understand what you're reading. The "missing link" or last common ancestor between apes and humans has not yet been discovered. Plenty of apparently transitional fossils have.

well,let's put Harun yahya aside.
Yes, let's.

though Dawkins ran away from him.
Dawkins didn't run away from anybody. He's a scientist. He doesn't debate any creationists, because creationism has nothing to do with science. Having said that, I think a debate between Dawkins and Yahya could be quite interesting.

however,this link may help
DNA of Human and chimpanzee
This is all a matter of different counting methods, as explained here.

Peace
Reply

Alamgir
02-28-2018, 05:25 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,



That's twice now that people have posted links to this article. How do you think it helps your case? If you read beyond the title you'll find that it describes various aspects of the debate surrounding the LCA (last common ancestor). At no point does the article suggest that evolution is not true.

Peace
It says we have not found the missing link, which weakens your case that homo sapiens came from apes significantly
Reply

Good brother
02-28-2018, 07:39 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Ibn Shahid
It says we have not found the missing link, which weakens your case that homo sapiens came from apes significantly
Assalam alaikum

The argument that ‘These fossils are transitional’ comes up quite regularly, but it's evidently flawed. Actually, this is no argument at all. It must assume transitional fossils exist (i.e. evolution theory/Neo-darwinism is true) in the first place to conclude that these fossils are transitional. So one must assume evolution theory to prove evolution theory; this is reasoning in a circle. Of course, if Neo-darwinism is true, the fossil of every extinct creature would be transitional — but this cannot be used as evidence for evolution theory.
Reply

Mahir Adnan
03-01-2018, 11:35 AM
He doesn't debate any creationists, because creationism has nothing to do with science.
Dawkins dare to debate priests, but not creationists! indeed, Dawkins is good at making people fool with such superb lame excuse.
As many others have already pointed out, this result is not wrong, it’s just irrelevant. Well, it might also be wrong. Others have found it difficult to reproduce his results. But even if his analysis is accurate, it is simply the wrong analysis to apply to dating the last common ancestor.
I quoted this from the you have given. it seems that,your link is supporting my post too. then what's the point of claiming ape as our ancestor!!! :o
Reply

czgibson
03-01-2018, 04:26 PM
Greetings,

format_quote Originally Posted by Ibn Shahid
It says we have not found the missing link, which weakens your case that homo sapiens came from apes significantly
If that were true, don't you think the article would have mentioned it? Why post a pro-evolution article when you're trying to oppose it?

The argument that ‘These fossils are transitional’ comes up quite regularly, but it's evidently flawed. Actually, this is no argument at all. It must assume transitional fossils exist (i.e. evolution theory/Neo-darwinism is true) in the first place to conclude that these fossils are transitional. So one must assume evolution theory to prove evolution theory; this is reasoning in a circle. Of course, if Neo-darwinism is true, the fossil of every extinct creature would be transitional — but this cannot be used as evidence for evolution theory.
There certainly appear to be transitional forms in the fossil record, consistent with evolutionary theory. What is your alternative explanation? God created all these creatures and then made the vast majority of them exitinct? Why would an omniscient being do something as pointless as that?

Dawkins dare to debate priests, but not creationists! indeed, Dawkins is good at making people fool with such superb lame excuse.
Debating with creationists is like arguing with someone who believes the moon is made of cheese - it's just an obviously ludicrous proposition, so I can see why Dawkins couldn't be bothered to do it. However, as I say, I would still like to see him debate Harun Yahya if only to see Yahya humiliate himself in public.

I quoted this from the you have given. it seems that,your link is supporting my post too. then what's the point of claiming ape as our ancestor!!!
Again, you don't appear to understand the words you're reading. Never mind.

Peace
Reply

Eric H
03-01-2018, 06:34 PM
Greetings and peace be with you czgibson;
What is your alternative explanation? God created all these creatures and then made the vast majority of them exitinct? Why would an omniscient being do something as pointless as that?
Both you and I will be extinct within the next century, why would God do something as pointless as that? ;D

The question of evolution is not a big deal either way. I think the greater question is how could the universe and life come to be without a Creator God?

In the spirit of searching for God
Eric
Reply

Alamgir
03-01-2018, 08:02 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,



If that were true, don't you think the article would have mentioned it? Why post a pro-evolution article when you're trying to oppose it?
They mentioned it in the title lol, was that not a good enough mention?

You don't have any concrete proof of macro-evolution, only things that are consistent with it. Fossils looking similar is not concrete proof for common ancestry, one could argue they look similar as they are adapted to carrying out similar functions, or the fact that there are many creatures that despite looking similar, are not that closely related. Genetics is not an argument either, since one could simply argue God made the creatures with similar materials or that (again) they are designed to carry out similar functions.

Anyway, I don't have a personal problem with macro-evolution as a whole since it works, my problem is saying Homo-Sapiens evolved from another creature. Unless you can give me concrete proof, I will not even entertain such a ridiculous notion, especially when you consider how unique humans are to the rest of the living creatures on the planet, especially in terms of intelligence and emotions.
Reply

Scimitar
03-01-2018, 08:11 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Mahir Adnan;2985389[TABLE="class: grid, width: 100%, align: center"
We've got more in common with a banana ;)
Reply

Zafran
03-02-2018, 01:31 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Ibn Shahid
They mentioned it in the title lol, was that not a good enough mention?

You don't have any concrete proof of macro-evolution, only things that are consistent with it. Fossils looking similar is not concrete proof for common ancestry, one could argue they look similar as they are adapted to carrying out similar functions, or the fact that there are many creatures that despite looking similar, are not that closely related. Genetics is not an argument either, since one could simply argue God made the creatures with similar materials or that (again) they are designed to carry out similar functions.

Anyway, I don't have a personal problem with macro-evolution as a whole since it works, my problem is saying Homo-Sapiens evolved from another creature. Unless you can give me concrete proof, I will not even entertain such a ridiculous notion, especially when you consider how unique humans are to the rest of the living creatures on the planet, especially in terms of intelligence and emotions.
You have to remember that evolutionary model or any scientific model for that matter will never talk about God simply because it presupposes naturalism. It has nothing to say beyond that.
Reply

Ümit
03-02-2018, 09:20 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Zafran
You have to remember that evolutionary model or any scientific model for that matter will never talk about God simply because it presupposes naturalism. It has nothing to say beyond that.
which is not wrong.
everything has a logical explanation...if you search and investigate you will find the answer.

Q: How does wind work?
A: Allah makes that possible.
Q: yeah, but can we understand the proces how this works?
A: of course, Allah makes a high pressure area and a low pressure area somewhere, and the wind is just air particles going from high to low pressure.
Q: how does Allah make high and low pressure area's?
A:etc.

you know where this is going right?
Of course Allah is behind every action because he makes it possible.
You can answer almost every question with "Allah makes that possible" which of course would be a correct answer, but that does not improve us understanding the logic behind it.
Reply

Mahir Adnan
03-02-2018, 07:14 PM
Debating with creationists is like arguing with someone who believes the moon is made of cheese -
it seems,Debating with priests, is not like arguing with someone who believes the moon is made of cheese!!! :facepalm: still, I am not convinced. try other arguments.
you don't appear to understand the words you're reading.
I will be happy, if you help me to understand.. && I will be happier, if you find out any lie that I have made in my thread(in the link I gave you on dna of man and ape)
please, let me know if I miss any fossil.
https://www.islamicboard.com/health-...ml#post2985651
Reply

Zafran
03-03-2018, 04:59 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by umie
which is not wrong.
everything has a logical explanation...if you search and investigate you will find the answer.

Q: How does wind work?
A: Allah makes that possible.
Q: yeah, but can we understand the proces how this works?
A: of course, Allah makes a high pressure area and a low pressure area somewhere, and the wind is just air particles going from high to low pressure.
Q: how does Allah make high and low pressure area's?
A:etc.

you know where this is going right?
Of course Allah is behind every action because he makes it possible.
You can answer almost every question with "Allah makes that possible" which of course would be a correct answer, but that does not improve us understanding the logic behind it.
There is one thing understanding Allah swt Sunan of how the Universe works - a different matter on how our perception,theories and models of the way the universe works.

If these models are useful and have the best explanation of the apparent phenomena with great predictive power - then that is practical. However science keeps adapting to new data and sometimes totally ditches old models for newer models (paradigm shift).

examples of these are the Geo centric model for the Helio centric model
Explanation of gravity Newton vs Einstein.
Time fixed or Einstein theory of relativity
evolutionary Biology
Tectonic plates
Quantity mechanics
Qualitative to the Quantitative.

so we need to be careful what we state as "true" according to the data we have. Instead we should state its the best explanation of what we have of the data (abductive reasoning).
Reply

Ümit
03-03-2018, 09:50 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Zafran
There is one thing understanding Allah swt Sunan of how the Universe works - a different matter on how our perception,theories and models of the way the universe works.

If these models are useful and have the best explanation of the apparent phenomena with great predictive power - then that is practical. However science keeps adapting to new data and sometimes totally ditches old models for newer models (paradigm shift).

examples of these are the Geo centric model for the Helio centric model
Explanation of gravity Newton vs Einstein.
Time fixed or Einstein theory of relativity
evolutionary Biology
Tectonic plates
Quantity mechanics
Qualitative to the Quantitative.

so we need to be careful what we state as "true" according to the data we have. Instead we should state its the best explanation of what we have of the data (abductive reasoning).
Which is also not wrong. Science is just a tool for us to try to understand Allahs creation. We continously try to develop theories and formulas for every unknown phenomenon. Our formulas and theories are just an approximation of the reality. But that is good enough for us to work with...until someone comes along and develops a more accurate formula. That is how it works.
Reply

Scimitar
03-03-2018, 12:39 PM
These threads are still trending on islamicboard :D

science says ‘I’m interestied in processes which is why I ask “how” and nothing else’

islam says ‘I’m interested in reason and also process which is why I ask “why” first and “how” second’

science is only a tool (as mentioned above) and science is never concerned with truth or reason, only process - a one trick pony.

now, back to my ice cream sandwich nom nom nom
Reply

Abz2000
06-14-2018, 04:49 PM
People in the know knew through the overwhelming amount of prophecies that the Messiah (whose parable is that of Adam) would come to earth just as they knew that Moses would come to earth, but did these individuals just appear as grown ups or did they come through natural (sometimes slightly extraordinary) live births and go through the many of the fitnahs which other people go through?

Did Moses :as: know he was the Prophet Moses until the time Allah :swt: spoke to him when he needed comfort and guidance? Qadr is difficult to fathom but it does work alongside actual choices does it not?
I believe Qadr is a lot more difficult to comprehend and explain than something as simple as evolution.

Innee jaa'ilun fi al ard i khaleefah.
Then they ate of the forbidden tree.
Then they got evicted.
Then they turned up and met in another dimension - and their dna is very close to that of apes and swine - the two critters mentioned in the Quran which was revealed 1,400 years ago (long before dna sequencing) to an illiterate ex shepherd boy :saws: who would turn out to be the most observantly followed man in the universe.

Do i think that humans descended directly from apes and swine? No.
Do i think that apes and swine may be descended from close common ancestors who disappeared in the early ages of competitive tribal warfare (read up on the favouring of certain tribes which continued up until the revelation of the Quran for All of humankind)? A high probability.

32. Say: "Obey Allah and His Messenger.: But if they turn back, Allah loveth not those who reject Faith.
33. Allah did choose Adam and Noah, the family of Abraham, and the family of 'Imran above 'aalamimeen (all creation),-
34. Offspring, one of the other: And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.
35. Behold! a woman of 'Imran said: "O my Lord! I do dedicate unto Thee what is in my womb for Thy special service: So accept this of me: For Thou hearest and knowest all things."


From quran Chapter 3



Do i think that there was a gradual sifting of creatures until Adam's soul on earth heard the guidance? A high probability given all the skeletons of ancient sub-human species that are being found regularly.

I don't know the unseen in that regard and am not required to make a certain judgement on it in order to choose between universal right and wrong actions so i will keep my mind open on the topic.

One thing i am certain of though is that Jesus did not appear on earth like arnold schwarzenegger. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIeuBPDUzB0
(Though some arrogant people still want to see God come with angels in ghamaam (clouds) (were you looking for God? - or were you looking for the individual in a red bloody ihram?) and like to watch and focus on anti-Christ and anti-God algorithms and perspiration fall when the head is lowered and beads like pearls scatter for the taking when the head is raised - forgetting that it's dogs clinging to the earth that eat from under the table). Inna maa futintum bih wa rabbukum ar Rahmaan.
Wasn't the dream of the two shoulders at ka'bah enough of a sign?
But then - some people live in the moment and forget that generations come and go - and that continually available eternal salvation (fount of living water) comes from following the guidance of Allah with unity, just as others think that rivers of milk and honey exist in a blood drenched land filled with injustice and corruption.

The day they see the angels - no glad tidings to the unjust "suspected witch" dunkers.

The people of kafiristan are dismayed when they realize that the man who would be king is neither God - nor devil, but then - it is only in the land of the totally blind that only a one eyed man must be king and guide.
1776.

Ye blind guides - what is more sacred? The gift or the being that sanctifies the gift?



Umm Salama, a wife of Muhammad, is quoted as saying that;
His [the Mahdi's] aim is to establish a moral system from which all superstitious faiths have been eliminated. In the same way that students enter Islam, so unbelievers will come to believe.

When the Mahdi appears, Allah will cause such power of vision and hearing to be manifested in believers that the Mahdi will call to the whole world from where he is, with no postman involved, and they will hear and even see him.

Amr bin Shuaib reported from his grandfather that the Messenger of Allah said:
In Dhu al-Qi'dah (Islamic month), there will be fight among the tribes, Muslim pilgrims will be looted and there will be a battle in Mina in which many people will be slain and blood will flow until it runs over the Jamaratul Aqba (one of the three stone pillars at Mina). The man they seek will flee and will be found between the Rukn (a corner of the Kaaba containing the Black Stone) and the Maqam of Prophet Abraham (near Ka'ba). He will be forced to accept people's Bay'ah (being chosen as a Leader/Caliph). The number of those offering Bay'ah will be the same as the number of the people of Badr (Muslim fighters who participated in the Battle of Badr at time of Prophet Mohammad). Then, the dweller of Heaven and the dweller of the Earth will be pleased with him.[40]


22“If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened. 23At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Messiah!’ or, ‘There he is!’ do not believe it. 24For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25See, I have told you ahead of time.

26“So if anyone tells you, ‘There he is, out in the wilderness,’ do not go out; or, ‘Here he is, in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it.
27For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.
28Wherever there is a carcass, there the vultures will gather.

29“Immediately after the distress of those days

“ ‘the sun will be darkened,
and the moon will not give its light;
the stars will fall from the sky,
and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’b
30“Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earthc will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.d 31And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.

From Matthew 24


He is in the east, in the east, in the east. - who? oh still confused?


1. When the sun (with its spacious light) is folded up;
2. When the stars fall, losing their lustre;
3. When the mountains vanish (like a mirage);
4. When the she-camels, ten months with young, are left untended;
5. When the wild beasts are herded together (in the human habitations);
6. When the oceans boil over with a swell;
7. When the souls are sorted out, (being joined, like with like);
8. When the female (infant), buried alive, is questioned -
9. For what crime she was killed;
10. When the scrolls are laid open;
11. When the world on High is unveiled;
12. When the Blazing Fire is kindled to fierce heat;
13. And when the Garden is brought near;-
14. (Then) shall each soul know what it has put forward.
15. So verily I call to witness the planets - that recede,
16. Go straight, or hide;
17. And the Night as it dissipates;
18. And the Dawn as it breathes away the darkness;-
19. Verily this is the word of a most honourable Messenger,
20. Endued with Power, with rank before the Lord of the Throne,
21. With authority there, (and) faithful to his trust.
22. And (O people!) your companion is not one possessed;
23. And without doubt he saw him in the clear horizon.
24. Neither doth he withhold grudgingly a knowledge of the Unseen.
25. Nor is it the word of an evil spirit accursed.
26. When whither go ye?
27. Verily this is no less than a Message to (all) the Worlds:
28. (With profit) to whoever among you wills to go straight:
29. But ye shall not will except as Allah wills,- the Cherisher of the Worlds.

Quran Chapter 81


10However, after his brothers had left for the festival, he went also, not publicly, but in secret. 11Now at the festival the Jewish leaders were watching for Jesus and asking, “Where is he?”

12Among the crowds there was widespread whispering about him. Some said, “He is a good man.”

Others replied, “No, he deceives the people.” 13But no one would say anything publicly about him for fear of the leaders.

Jesus Teaches at the Festival

14Not until halfway through the festival did Jesus go up to the temple courts and begin to teach. 15The Jews there were amazed and asked, “How did this man get such learning without having been taught?”

16Jesus answered, “My teaching is not my own. It comes from the one who sent me. 17Anyone who chooses to do the will of God will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own. 18Whoever speaks on their own does so to gain personal glory, but he who seeks the glory of the one who sent him is a man of truth; there is nothing false about him. 19Has not Moses given you the law? Yet not one of you keeps the law. Why are you trying to kill me?”

20“You are demon-possessed,” the crowd answered. “Who is trying to kill you?”

21Jesus said to them, “I did one miracle, and you are all amazed. 22Yet, because Moses gave you circumcision (though actually it did not come from Moses, but from the patriarchs), you circumcise a boy on the Sabbath. 23Now if a boy can be circumcised on the Sabbath so that the law of Moses may not be broken, why are you angry with me for healing a man’s whole body on the Sabbath?

24Stop judging by mere appearances, but instead judge correctly.”

Division Over Who Jesus Is

25At that point some of the people of Jerusalem began to ask,
“Isn’t this the man they are trying to kill?
26Here he is, speaking publicly, and they are not saying a word to him. Have the authorities really concluded that he is the Messiah? 27But we know where this man is from; when the Messiah comes, no one will know where he is from.”

28Then Jesus, still teaching in the temple courts, cried out, “Yes, you know me, and you know where I am from. I am not here on my own authority, but he who sent me is true. You do not know him, 29but I know him because I am from him and he sent me.”

From John 7



New International Version
"Look, he is coming with the clouds," and "every eye will see him, even those who pierced him"; and all peoples on earth "will mourn because of him." So shall it be! Amen.

New Living Translation
Look! He comes with the clouds of heaven. And everyone will see him--even those who pierced him. And all the nations of the world will mourn for him. Yes! Amen!

English Standard Version
Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him, and all tribes of the earth will wail on account of him. Even so. Amen.

Revelation 1:7




Who? God? Or the man in the blood soaked ihram? - a day of mourning for ALL the unjust..


هَلْ يَنظُرُونَ إِلَّا أَن يَأْتِيَهُمُ اللَّهُ فِي ظُلَلٍ مِّنَ الْغَمَامِ وَالْمَلَائِكَةُ وَقُضِيَ الْأَمْرُ وَإِلَى اللَّهِ تُرْجَعُ الْأُمُورُ

Muhammad Asad
Are these people waiting, perchance, for God to reveal Himself unto them in the shadows of the clouds, together with the angels - although [by then] all will have been decided, and unto God all things will have been brought back?

M. M. Pickthall
Wait they for naught else than that Allah should come unto them in the shadows of the clouds with the angels? Then the case would be already judged. All cases go back to Allah (for judgment).

Yusuf Ali (Saudi Rev. 1985)
Will they wait until Allah comes to them in canopies of clouds, with angels (in His train) and the question is (thus) settled? but to Allah do all questions go back (for decision).

Quran 2:210



وَقَالَ الَّذِينَ لَا يَرْجُونَ لِقَاءَنَا لَوْلَا أُنزِلَ عَلَيْنَا الْمَلَائِكَةُ أَوْ نَرَىٰ رَبَّنَا لَقَدِ اسْتَكْبَرُوا فِي أَنفُسِهِمْ وَعَتَوْا عُتُوًّا كَبِيرًا

Muhammad Asad
But those who do not believe that they are destined to meet Us are wont to say, “Why have no angels been sent down to us?” – or, “Why do we not see our Sustainer?” Indeed, they are far too proud of themselves, having rebelled [against God’s truth] with utter disdain!

M. M. Pickthall
And those who look not for a meeting with Us say: Why are angels not sent down unto us and (Why) do we not see our Lord! Assuredly they think too highly of themselves and are scornful with great pride.

Yusuf Ali (Saudi Rev. 1985)
Such as fear not the meeting with Us (for Judgment) say: "Why are not the angels sent down to us, or (why) do we not see our Lord?" Indeed they have an arrogant conceit of themselves, and mighty is the insolence of their impiety!



يَوْمَ يَرَوْنَ الْمَلَائِكَةَ لَا بُشْرَىٰ يَوْمَئِذٍ لِّلْمُجْرِمِينَ وَيَقُولُونَ حِجْرًا مَّحْجُورًا

Muhammad Asad
[Yet] on that Day - the Day on which they shall see the angels there will be no glad tiding for those who were lost in sin; and they will exclaim, “By a forbidding ban [are we from God’s grace debarred]!”

M. M. Pickthall
On the day when they behold the angels, on that day there will be no good tidings for the guilty; and they will cry: A forbidding ban!

Yusuf Ali (Saudi Rev. 1985)
The Day they see the angels,- no joy will there be to the sinners that Day: The (angels) will say: "There is a barrier forbidden (to you) altogether!"

Quran 25:21-22


Phew - i'm on a roll today.
Reply

سيف الله
01-27-2019, 10:42 PM
Salaam

Not sure where to post this as there are quite a few threads on evolution. Rather than make a new thread I'll post this here. Vox takes a sceptical view on the whole concept of evolution.



Reply

Trkm7586
01-22-2020, 11:44 AM
Evolution theory is wrong according to the Islam.I don't believe in evolution.Even the majority of the world christian population in Latin Amerixa,Caraibean,Sub-saharan Africa(Sub-saharan Africa has got 63% christian majority https://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/sub-saharan-africa/ ),Phillipines etc don't believe in evolution.The majority of the world's population don't believe in the evolution theory.

Projected Religious Population Changes in Sub-Saharan Africa | Pew Research Center
The total population in sub-Saharan Africa is expected to grow at a faster pace than in any other region in the decades ahead, more than doubling from 823...
Reply

CuriousonTruth
01-22-2020, 03:01 PM
Ibn Khaldun is a very smart and intelligent character. I really need to find time to read his works.
Reply

CuriousonTruth
05-06-2020, 12:17 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by anatolian
Salam. Since the subject is heated frequently here and everywhere I thought it is a good idea to discuss its Islamic roots if there is any. I personally believe that evolution is real and it perfectly explains the creation. All the confusion comes from some misinterpretations of Quran and older scriptures. Ibn Khaldun was the first evolutionist in the history of Islam and most probably Darwin was influenced by him. He thought the creation of man does not contradict with the idea of men coming from apes.

https://muslims4uk.com/2013/01/19/ib...evolution/amp/

“It should be known that we – May God guide you and us – notice that this world with all the created things in it has a certain order and solid construction. It shows nexuses between causes and things caused, combinations of some parts of creation with others, and transformations of some existent things into others, in a pattern that is both remarkable and endless.

(…)

One should then look at the world of creation. It started out from the minerals and progressed, in an ingenious, gradual manner, to plants and animals. The last stage of minerals is connected with the first stage of plants, such as herbs and seedless plants. The last stage of plants, such as palms and vines, is connected with the first stage of animals, such as snails and shellfish which have only the power of touch. The word “connection” with regard to these created things means that the last stage of each group is fully prepared to become the first stage of the next group.

The animal world then widens, its species become numerous, and, in a gradual process of creation, it finally leads to man, who is able to think and to reflect. The higher stage of man is reached from the world of the monkeys, in which both sagacity and perception are found, but which has not reached the stage of actual reflection and thinking. At this point we come to the first stage of man after (the world of monkeys). This is as far as our (physical) observation extends.

Now, in the various worlds we find manifold influences. In the world of sensual perception there are certain influences of the motions of the spheres and the elements. In the world of creation there are certain influences of the motions of growth and perception. All this is evidence of the fact that there is something that exercises an influence and is different from the bodily substances. This is something spiritual. It is connected with the created things, because the various worlds must be connected in their existence. This spiritual thing is the soul, which has perception and causes motion.

Above the soul there must exist something else that gives the soul the power of perception and motion, and that is also connected with it. Its essence should be pure perception and absolute intellection. This is the world of the angels. The soul, consequently, must be prepared to exchange humanity for angelicality, in order actually to become part of the angelic species at certain times in the flash of a moment. This happens after the spiritual essence of the soul has become perfect in actuality, as we shall mention later on“
While being one of the first in the Sunni world to entertain the idea of evolution, it was al-Tusi who was the first in the "Islamic world". I put double quotes because he was a shia. But anyway he was the first.
Reply

Eric H
05-07-2020, 11:05 AM
The word evolve means that something had to exist first. If nothing existed, then there is nothing to evolve.

The universe had to come into existence, the first life had to come into existence, without the first life, then life cannot evolve. The first light sensitive cells had to come into existence before eyes could evolve. Like wise brain cells, muscle tissue optic nerves and thousands, probably millions more first time events. Darwin's finches with beaks had to exist before they could evolve and explain his theory.

I am not sure how science can explain any of these first time events, using science alone.
Reply

CuriousonTruth
05-07-2020, 01:05 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eric H
The word evolve means that something had to exist first. If nothing existed, then there is nothing to evolve.

The universe had to come into existence, the first life had to come into existence, without the first life, then life cannot evolve. The first light sensitive cells had to come into existence before eyes could evolve. Like wise brain cells, muscle tissue optic nerves and thousands, probably millions more first time events. Darwin's finches with beaks had to exist before they could evolve and explain his theory.

I am not sure how science can explain any of these first time events, using science alone.
Yes well I guess this is where religious and atheistic people would diverge. While religious may believe with sufficient stonewall evidence there was some sort of evolution, they would also attribute the agency of evolution or that Eureka moment to God. Whereas atheists attribute it to natural selection.
Reply

Apollo
07-25-2020, 10:10 AM
Here we go again. Darwin never stated that Humans evolved from apes.

As regards Man, surely that people who moved to hotter climates would over hundreds of thousands of years have mutation in genes that allow skin colour to evolve as darker skin in order to adapt to the environment. They are still human.

My only question is what can we say about neanderthals?
Reply

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

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 96
    Last Post: 02-10-2018, 06:42 PM
  2. Replies: 146
    Last Post: 02-05-2012, 08:22 PM
  3. Replies: 41
    Last Post: 05-30-2010, 10:00 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-11-2007, 11:22 PM
  5. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-26-2005, 09:25 PM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!