Evolution and Islam

Greetings and peace be with you MicroSalma;

Many Christian denominations, including Catholicism and Anglicanism, have taken such a liberal (and some would say 'loose') interpretation of their scripture that they now accept evolution. So clearly it can be united with faith (although I feel they have cheated a bit).

I am a Catholic, and I agree with you that when Christians accept evolution they may be cheating a bit with their faith. It seems that you might also be asking your Muslim brothers and sisters to cheat a bit and find ways to bend their faith and accept evolution.

I guess this thread seems a little heated at the moment, but please do not feel downhearted or give up. I often find that when some part of scriptures seems wrong to me, it keeps niggling away in my mind, and it keeps me searching for truth,

I have faith in the Bible, that every species was created according to its kind, so I cannot agree with the theory of evolution either.


In the spirit of searching for God

Eric

format_quote Originally Posted by MicroSalma

f I had to choose between Islam and evolution, it would be evolution. Not because I don't have faith, but because I value facts over faith (and I hope you all do too).

I would choose Islam. Not that because I don't value facts, but all facts are not always available and decisions has to be made beyond looking at just the surface. Life is much more complicated than that and thus that would be hypocritical for me to do that with God. It is the worst place to be hypocritical.

format_quote Originally Posted by MicroSalma

No amount of faith could convince you that the Earth is flat, could it?

As I explained earlier you are comparing oranges with apples.

format_quote Originally Posted by MicroSalma

I read Chapter 4, and although I like the references to 'stages', they seem very vague (and in context, most are clearly referring to embryonic development).

I don't really see a problem, the author articulated his understanding very well that that understanding can't be ruled out. There is nothing specific in the verse to rule that out.

format_quote Originally Posted by MicroSalma

More importantly though, it doesn't appear to resolve the problem of Adam and Eve...

What Adam and Eve problem exactly? You mentioned the verses I don't see them going against any known facts and understanding from Quran.

I can't go through all of them 1 by 1, I've busy schedule, but I'll make some room.

lets look at 2:30-39

(30) AND LO! Thy Sustainer said unto the angels: "Behold, I am about to establish upon earth one who shall inherit it." They said: "Wilt Thou place on it such as will spread corruption thereon and shed blood -whereas it is we who extol Thy limitless glory, and praise Thee, and hallow Thy name?" [God] answered: "Verily, I know that which you do not know."

Nothing there against known facts.

(31) And He imparted unto Adam the names of all things; then He brought them within the ken of the angels and said: "Declare unto Me the names of these [things], if what you say is true."
(32) They replied: "Limitless art Thou in Thy glory! No knowledge have we save that which Thou hast imparted unto us. Verily, Thou alone art all-knowing, truly wise."
(33) Said He: "O Adam, convey unto them the names of these [things]." And as soon as [Adam] had conveyed unto them their names, [God] said: "Did I not say unto you, `Verily, I alone know the hidden reality of the heavens and the earth, and know all that you bring into the open and all. that you would conceal'?"
(34) And when We told the angels, "Prostrate yourselves before Adam!" -they all prostrated themselves, save Iblis, who refused and gloried in his arrogance: and thus he became one of those who deny the truth.
(35) And We said: "O Adam, dwell thou and thy wife in this garden, and eat freely thereof, both of you, whatever you may wish; but do not approach this one tree, lest you become wrongdoers."

I don't see any problem there.

(36) But Satan caused them both to stumble therein, and thus brought about the loss of their erstwhile state. And so We said: "Down with you, [and be henceforth] enemies unto one another; and on earth you shall have your abode and your livelihood for a while!"

I don't see issue there either except what is meant by the place they were sent down from. Which is debatable. If that is the issue than I can add more on that.

(37) Thereupon Adam received words [of guidance] from his Sustainer, and He accepted his repentance: for, verily, He alone is the-Acceptor of Repentance, the Dispenser of Grace.
(38) [For although] We did say, "Down with you all from this [state]," there shall, none the less, most certainly come unto you guidance from Me: and those who follow My guidance need have no fear, and neither shall they grieve;
(39) but those who are bent on denying the truth and giving the lie to Our messages - they are destined for the fire, and therein shall they abide.

I don't see any problem.

Now lets look at 4:1

(1) O MANKIND! Be conscious of your Sustainer, who has created you out of one living entity, and out of it created its mate, and out of the two spread abroad a multitude of men and women. And remain conscious of God, in whose name you demand [your rights] from one another, and of these ties of kinship. Verily, God is ever watchful over you!

It says specifically, ip so facto, that we have descended from a single entity it could be Adam (or Eve) or something else like a cell. What is exactly the problem with that? So supposedly all living creatures have common decent, but human race can't have common decent. I don't really see why that goes against evolution, actually, majority of evidence is pointing to single origin theory for humans, but it is not specific enough to know that all humans have common ancestor or not.

format_quote Originally Posted by MicroSalma

If I had to choose between Islam and evolution, it would be evolution. Not because I don't have faith, but because I value facts over faith (and I hope you all do too).

No amount of faith could convince you that the Earth is flat, could it? Well it's like that for me.

Nevertheless, I'm not yet convinced that they're incompatible.



Thank you, I read the original post in that thread (but lost interest in the comments that followed once they started flaming each other and making ludicrous claims). It's certainly on the right topic, but it doesn't seem correct to me: it appears to claim that all other life may (or may not) have evolved, but humans definitely did not. Despite what the article claims, this is in contradiction with modern science...



I already have: we evolved. Want to know more? Read a book on it - thousands have been written over the past 150 years, so take your pick.



Thank you. I read Chapter 4, and although I like the references to 'stages', they seem very vague (and in context, most are clearly referring to embryonic development). More importantly though, it doesn't appear to resolve the problem of Adam and Eve...

Modern science is in contradiction with itself. I would not bet over it.

Regarding your assertion that you'd take evolution over Islam, it remains for you to prove whether those facts are unbiased or not.

format_quote Originally Posted by tetsujin

I have not found a way to reconcile the creation story as presented in the Quran with the theory of evolution.

The closest I got was something similar to Dr. Israr Ahmed's view that evolution is true, however natural selection is not the driving mechanism. Each stage (generation) required a "kun" (a commandment) from Allah, and therefore Allah was guiding the path of genetic "variations". I guess I don't need to explain to you the problems with that idea.

Anyways... as it stands, evolution doesn't state that god cannot exist. It does conflict with special creation myths, and religions with creation stories. Islam is one of them. Evolution doesn't care whether or not you believe in God.



I felt the same way. You can't selectively choose what you want to believe, then it's no longer the same religion.



Which ones? The one's that deal with the facts of nature? If we can't take those at face value, how are we supposed to believe that an angel whose wings span the entire horizon visited a desert merchant, gave him a hug, and passed on poetry and the meaning of life or that a winged mule took him to heaven and back.



None that I know of, at least none that understand the implications of this controversial issue.




What are you working on?


All the best,


Faysal

What sort of problems you reckon arise from that idea?

format_quote Originally Posted by Dagless

In answer to the question posed by the OP:

If we accept evolution then I can think of 3 ways to try and make it compatible...

1) If Adam and Eve (pbut) were not in created in currently accepted human form and we evolved from them (or they were in human form and we are not in human form - if that sounds more respectful).

2) If the process of creation is evolution, and Adam (as) was created incrementally.

I don't think either of the above ways are acceptable in Islam. The first might be semi-true because it is mentioned that those who came before us were taller/larger (although that doesn't mean a different species)... which leads me onto...

3) Accepting natural selection, but only within species boundaries.

Lastly, if you agree with everything else in the Quran and the truth lines up, then you can surely give it the benefit of the doubt over evolution?

Maybe evolution will be added to later, or some parts disproven long after our deaths? I know it seems unlikely, but doesn't it always?

Personally I am more comfortable bending evolution to fit within Islam than trying to find a way to interpret Islam to fit into evolution. I think that's a sure way to go astray in the long run.

She's bragging about facts as if she knows em all in the capacity of "an evolutionary biologist who has 10 years of experience and takes facts over faith." I am sure her supervisor allowed her to work in his/her lab based on his faith in her potential to succeed and not the facts when she would have none as a student with no publication. Scientists probably bragged about Newtons Theory of Gravity as the sole "fact" that they knew which the laymen did not but then Einstein's theory of general relativity showed that Newton's work was semi-accurate, it was only an approximation of reality and it failed to work in systems where masses were huge ...
It is as likely for evidence to emerge which shows that current understanding of evolution was totally wrong. As a Muslim, would you bet your faith over such " evolving (the irony) facts?"

format_quote Originally Posted by tetsujin

Many.

Why would god choose the one mechanism that could work independently?

Why would god create so much wasteful genetic code to produce the alive on Earth today? or Why would god create so much life on earth prior to humans? or Why would god make it seem that the earth is so old?

Why does every phylogenetic tree or every maternal or paternal DNA lineage show that we are related to other species beyond what is statistically negligible.

How does Islam explain the innumerable species which died and were extinct prior to our best estimate of the first human?

Why did god create viruses?

Why would god create creatures that do not have 2 sexes (either one or many)?

and more....


All the best,


Faysal

Those are not scientific questions because you brought God in. You cannot answer why God did what He did but only how God did what He did. By that token, any idea creates problems. Why does God put Muslims in trials even though they are on truth?

Dr. Israr's explanation is for those who believe in God.

Please delete (mad_scientist beat me to it).

format_quote Originally Posted by MicroSalma

Salaam! So I've not long joined and I'm already bringing the tone down! Sorry! Hehe

So we're all familiar to some extent with the evolution versus creationism debate which has recently picked up some momentum in America (amongst the evangelicals, anyway). The problem is, I've yet to hear a reconciliation of evolution with the Qur'an!

Many Christian denominations, including Catholicism and Anglicanism, have taken such a liberal (and some would say 'loose') interpretation of their scripture that they now accept evolution. So clearly it can be united with faith (although I feel they have cheated a bit).

My question however, is how we unite evolution with Islam. From what I've read, it seems quite bleak, as virtually all scholars (and, naturally, critics) seem to consider them incompatible. Even Dr Zakir Naik, someone whose opinion I've longed respected, responded to the problem with 'evolution is only a theory'!

Indeed, the Qur'an gives quite an elaborate account (2:30-39) of how Allah created Adam (and then Eve) in Heaven, and then sent them to the Earth for having sinned, and that we humans all descend from the single soul of Adam (4:1), etc.

But this of course is a very different story to what really happened! I'm wondering whether these verses are to be taken allegorically? Indeed, 3:6 tells us that some verses should be taken allegorically...

So what are your thoughts? I've heard some Muslims claim that they are compatible...

I anticipate that some (hopefully few) of you will respond that evolution is rubbish, but as someone who has studied biology for the past decade and now works in the field of evolutionary biology, that would be like telling me the world is flat, so please don't bother.

Looking forward to your replies!

Salma.

P.S. Sorry for the long post.
P.P.S. Sorry to any moderators if this is in the wrong topic area!

Hello

Why do you think Islam ought to be reconciled with Evolution? As someone who tried to do the same thing I found it a dead end. It gets worse with the hadith where you get things like God made Eve from Adam's rib & God made Adam in His image. Maybe you should find God elsewhere.
In all honesty I think if anyone were to reconcile Adam and Eve with evolution it would be using the same 'cheating' that you find with the Pope's explanation of it. One thing came way before the other thing got discovered and that's that.

format_quote Originally Posted by MicroSalma

A bit of a long response. I'll be back later (or more likely tomorrow) to add some more replies.



In every forum I've been to, we have a system whereby the person who asks the question gets to decide the topic. This way, the asker can ensure that their question is addressed. It also prevents people from ranting randomly and disrupting an intelligible conversation.

So either this forum is unique (in a bad way), or you're just a very rude person (which appears more likely). In fact, I don't intend on responding to any of your comments here on out, so don't waste your breath. But first...



Actually, it is commonly used internet lingo; indeed, UrbanDictionary has an entry for it (which is the definition I borrowed).



This isn't an original question, and it's frustrating that these same questions are asked over and over again even after they've been answered. I'm not dodging the question though, as it's a decent one:

First of all, there are not 'billions' of species, more like millions. Second of all, how many features can you really list that are completely unique to humans?

Physically, we are 'holomorphic' to countless other animals; and even many of our mental characteristics are not unique - other animals exhibit emotions (such as attachment, sorrow, and loneliness) plus altruism. Many animals cry out when suffering. Language is not unique to us. And many animals are amazing at problem solving (chimpanzees and even birds have outsmarted humans in solving certain problems!)

However, I of course don't deny that (despite the adorable, painting elephants), humans are the only ones with an appreciation for art, and we have the most complex language. But the most amazing characteristic of humans is our ability to reason and rationalise. So the question is: how is it that we can rationalise but others cannot? The answer is of course that our brain (in particular the cerebral cortex) has swelled up - it's massive. You might say 'ah! Well that's unique!' but no, not really. All mammals have a cerebral cortex, ours is just the largest.

You then asked why we're so much smarter than other animals, why aren't there others as intelligent as us? Well that's like asking why is there no animal that can travel faster than the Peregrine Falcon?

ONE animal has to be the fastest, just like one animal has to be the smartest. That animal is us. But then you might ask why our brains are so much bigger than others. But again, it's not that bizzare. The Peregrine Falcon can fly at about 200 mph, whereas the second fastest animal (the spine-tailed swift) can fly at only 100mph. If you were a Peregrine Falcon, you'd be arguing 'god must have created ME because I'm not only a bit faster than you, but TWICE as fast!'

The human brain is not even twice the same of a chimpanzees!!


Moving on... Thank you, Eric.




Not to me it's not.




The problem is that humans evolved, whereas the literal interpretation of Adam and Eve contradicts this quite clearly by saying that there was a 'first human', and that 'first human' was created in his present form (rather than having evolved).


Chuck, I shall try and respond to your comment on verses 2:30-39 in a moment (my post is becoming too large right now!) But quickly regarding 4:1: whose translation are you using? Pickthal uses the word 'soul' instead of 'living entity', and Yusuf Ali uses 'person'. Moreover, it's surely referring to Adam and Eve when it says (your translation) 'and out of it created its mate'.




Care to elaborate?


Thank you for the comments, tetsujin and Dagless.
And, mad_scientist: you are an incredibly unpleasant person.

Micro: you are utterly an unpleasant person because you are egoistic and arrogant woman. You come here and insult Quran and expect me to spread roses in your path. I also do not intend to reply to your deluded comments of reconciling evolution with Islam as they are devoid of any logic. The facts are in: you cant reconcile Islam with evolution.

format_quote Originally Posted by MicroSalma

Not to me it's not.

It doesn't matter whether to you it is or it is not, but technically you are comparing apples with oranges. You said you value facts, well, facts are not with you on this one.

format_quote Originally Posted by MicroSalma

The problem is that humans evolved, whereas the literal interpretation of Adam and Eve contradicts this quite clearly by saying that there was a 'first human', and that 'first human' was created in his present form (rather than having evolved).

That is a truth statement that humans evolved, I don't know the exact truth, I can assess and make conclusion but that wouldn't be the truth. Neither the literal text in Quran is specific enough to tell that God created Adam as it is or it was a long process of fashioning first human into Adam. This issue is not a clear from the text and it is open to interpretation.

The things that are specifically mentioned are the virgin birth of Jesus (pbuh) and Moses (pbuh) staff turn into serpent. These would have been more clear examples, of what is established in science vs Quran.

format_quote Originally Posted by MicroSalma

But quickly regarding 4:1: whose translation are you using? Pickthal uses the word 'soul' instead of 'living entity', and Yusuf Ali uses 'person'. Moreover, it's surely referring to Adam and Eve when it says (your translation) 'and out of it created its mate'.

I'm using Mohammad Asad's translation.

As for "and out of it created its mate", it just says that but doesn't explain how God created out of him his mate. Second, issue is not quite clear going by the actual text.

According to the Qur’ān, Eve was not created from Adam’s rib. The first verse of Sūrah Nisā explicitly states that the first man and woman (Adam and Eve) were created directly by the Almighty:

O mankind! Fear your Lord who created you from a single soul and of like nature his mate and from the two scattered [like seeds] countless men and women. (4:1)

Some people translate this verse as ‘It is he Who has created you from a single person (Adam) and then He created from him his wife (Eve)’. They explain this verse by saying that Eve was created from the rib of Adam. This misleading translation has probably arisen because of the Arabic words khalaqa minha zawjaha, which if literally translated mean ‘created from him [-- the initial soul--] his wife’. Actually the word minha (from the soul) does not imply that ‘Eve was made from Adam’; they rather imply that Eve was made from the same species as Adam, meaning that both were human. A similar verse points to this interpretation:

It is God who has made from your species your mates. (16:72)

A literal translation of the words ja‘ala lakum min anfusikum azwājā of the above quoted verse (which are very similar to khalaqa minha zawjaha) would mean ‘it is God which has created your mates from you’ implying that every wife is made from her husband as Eve was. This of course is incorrect; the word anfus (plural of nafs) in this verse means ‘genre’, ‘species’ and not ‘physical being’.
As far as the Hadīth you have quoted is concerned, it needs to be appreciated that in Arabic the words ‘created from’ do not necessarily refer to the substance of creation; they can also refer to the nature of something. For example the Qur’ān says: ‘Man has been created from hastiness’, (21:37). This does not of course mean that man’s substance is hastiness; it only refers to his nature.
Secondly, if all the texts of the Hadīth you have referred to are collected and analyzed, it becomes evident that the Prophet (sws) has compared the nature of a woman with a rib. The comparison subtly alludes to the fact that a woman’s nature is very delicate and tender as well as a bit adamant. The Prophet (sws) has advised men to treat them tactfully keeping in view this nature. Instead of forcing them to accept a particular point of view which will only bring out their obduracy, men should try to convince and persuade them.

http://www.monthly-renaissance.com/i...ry.aspx?id=483

I'll quote a friend of mine:

As far as the actual point of this verse, as Hussein would agree, it is meant to demonstrate that both Adam and Eve are the same nature, thus the idea of inequality, according to the Quran, is absolutely baseless. The Quran then goes on to say that all human beings stem from this couple, meaning they are all brethren and from the same family. This abolishes the idea of class systems as well as racial inequality.

As far as the creation of Adam, it is meant not for scientific purposes, but to demonstrate certain fundamental ideas which relate to the destiny and position of man. While Adam was created from this very earth, he also possesses a divine element which makes him unique in the scheme of the Almighty. This divine element gives expression to free will and the moral conscious, which man is suppose to develop to the best of his/her abilities. Since he is of this earth, the expression of the divine will happens in this earth.

format_quote Originally Posted by MicroSalma

Care to elaborate?

I mean how evolution is against humans descended from single parents or in other words a common ancestor? I don't see a problem. Actually, this is one of the place where they are close to each other.