This is an old post of mine explaining the relationship between God and evolution. I wrote it before I learned about Islam, so it was written based on the Old Testament. But I believe that it will make sense to Muslims who believe in evolution. I would like to know what you think.
I'll just keep this short and simple, then leave it as is. I only see this going in circles and to go any further than it has would be pointless.
format_quote Originally Posted by umie
So you do not see the connection between Adam as and Jesus as?
here is your daily dosis of biology then.
Humans have always a pair of chromosomes. males have XY chromosomes, females have XX chromosomes. egg cells only contain X chromosomes, so females can only pass X chromosomes to their offspring. spermcells however can contain either X, or Y chromosomes.
This means, during furtilization of an egg cell, the gender of the offspring is determined by the spermcell.
Jesus got his X chromosome from his mother...but where did he get the Y chromosome from? who's genes have been passed over to Jesus as? so here is the miracle with genes appearing from unknown source.
The same with Adam, but with the difference that not only Y, but both X and Y chromosomes have an unknown source.
so, birthed or not birthed is just a part of the issue.
You get the connection now?
COULD have happened, yes. It is a possibility. I am not ruling that out. Again, Science is not absolute and needs adjustment all the time...perhaps within 10 years the whole world gains new research results on evolution and we decide "this whole theory was just silly, what were we thinking?"
The apes somehow got extinct. they did not evolve into humans, that is for sure...but that can be also a part of the miracle...I do not know...again, I do not have all the answers over here.
Again, we do not believe in any theory...we believe in Islam...we just support this hybrid evolution theory...we do not say that this is how it happened...we say that this is a possibility how it might have happened...because every verse and hadeeth is still valid so it does not contradict with each other.
Allah is still present...he is still at the steering wheel.
I called your questions silly because you are still thinking about apes completely evolving into humans on their own parallel to Adam...that is not the case.
We just want to understand the process...that is all...stop thinking that we try to have an alternative to Islam...that is not the purpose here.
No. The confusion isn't with biology here. The confusion is how you are comparing the two in an attempt to explain your theory of evolution. Another example is how you state they were extinct and then in a line below that say they could have lived together. Actually, the confusion goes beyong that in many ways. Also, you can't say that you don't believe in any theory while at the same time saying you believe we evolved from apes up to the point of Adam (as). That is a theory. For those that believe Adam (as) had non human biological parents, that too is a theory. Then if you go to say that its possible, expect people to question you on it. So again, if you feel my questions (which are based on the theories you guys are posting about) are silly, I'll let that statement speak for itself.
I'll just keep this short and simple, then leave it as is. I only see this going in circles and to go any further than it has would be pointless.
No. The confusion isn't with biology here. The confusion is how you are comparing the two in an attempt to explain your theory of evolution.
You did not see the connection between Adam as and Jesus as and I showed you that connection...and it is a biological one...and according to me pretty clear connection.
format_quote Originally Posted by keiv
Another example is how you state they were extinct and then in a line below that say they could have lived together.
you are pulling everything I said out of context. how is that not possible?
The first thing I said is that I do not have all the questions...you acting like me being the person who knows everything is ridiculous...
second, why do you think that "they were extinct and then in a line below that say they could have lived together" exactly contradict with each other?
If you paid attention this was our conversation:
You: what happened to the 'apes who almost evolved to humans' once Adam (AS) was created, comes up.
Me: As you can see there are no apes around which are almost human, we can conclude these apes got extinct.
You: Did they disappear?
Me: maybe not directly, but eventually, yes
You: Did they live side by side?
Me: I do not have information about this, but they might have lived side by side for a while.
So summarized: whether they already were extinct at the point Adam as got created or not, I do not know. They might have existed at that moment and then slowly got extinct (which means they have been living side by side for xxx years, or they might have been wiped out instantly at the moment of Adams as creation. So, where is the contradiction in this answer? I do not get it.
format_quote Originally Posted by keiv
Actually, the confusion goes beyong that in many ways. Also, you can't say that you don't believe in any theory while at the same time saying you believe we evolved from apes up to the point of Adam (as). That is a theory. For those that believe Adam (as) had non human biological parents, that too is a theory.
No you still did not get it.
You see an unknown phenomenon, you investigate this phenomenon and tries to find an explanation for the cause of it, and how it works…so you develop a theory…this does not mean that this theory you thought out, is the absolute truth…but it might contain the answer, or at least point to a certain direction.
So no, I do not believe that the theory of evolution is the absolute truth…but it may be the answer…at least it sounds logical….of course we might be totally wrong with this one…but until now, it does not contradict Islam if you ask me.
format_quote Originally Posted by keiv
Then if you go to say that its possible, expect people to question you on it. So again, if you feel my questions (which are based on the theories you guys are posting about) are silly, I'll let that statement speak for itself.
Of course people can ask questions about it, and I will happily answer those and I won’t back off.
It’s just that your attacking manner and how you are trying to twist and turn my words in the way that suits you is bothering me a little.
You did not see the connection between Adam as and Jesus as and I showed you that connection...and it is a biological one.
Jesus had a biological mother, but Adam did not have a biological mother or father, similar but different.
The following are just my beliefs, so no proof offered. I believe God created all the species separately, once they were created then evolution happened. I do not believe you can use evolution to extrapolate back 4 billion years to single cell life, then use it to explain the complexity of the life we see today.
In the spirit of searching for God,
Eric
You will never look into the eyes of anyone who does not matter to God.
Jesus had a biological mother, but Adam did not have a biological mother or father, similar but different.
The following are just my beliefs, so no proof offered. I believe God created all the species separately, once they were created then evolution happened. I do not believe you can use evolution to extrapolate back 4 billion years to single cell life, then use it to explain the complexity of the life we see today.
In the spirit of searching for God,
Eric
So, you are talking about micro evolution as it's called. species being able to change theirselves in a minor way over generations according to the changes in nature...but not changing in such a way that you get a complete new species...not from fish to reptile or something.
I do not rule that out either. I am just keeping all options open....but still...I do not see that macro evolution contradicts Islam...that is what I am saying.
So, you are talking about micro evolution as it's called. species being able to change theirselves in a minor way over generations according to the changes in nature...but not changing in such a way that you get a complete new species...not from fish to reptile or something.
That pretty much sums up my thoughts on Evolution. Having said that, evolution has no real meaning to me, it does not inspire me to do anything. I even find myself agreeing with Richard Dawkins when he said; we should not live our lives based on evolutionary principles.
Faith in God has a real meaning to me, and it does inspire my outlook on life.
Wishing you every blessing through Ramadan.
Eric
You will never look into the eyes of anyone who does not matter to God.
Sorry to say but this fatwa failed to convince me that the giver of this fatwa has made a well-informed conclusion. First of all...the fatwa giver never elaborates why believing in evolution is a kufr...he just claims that and continues to explain when someone can be called kafir. Second, evolution is more than only darwinism...the theory has gone through some development after Darwin.
For what İ know, this guy just heard that evolution contradicted İslam...never took the effort to investigate...and just followed blindly what he heard.
Someone with more convincing fatwas? Please share.
45Finally the temple guards went back to the chief priests and the Pharisees, who asked them, “Why didn’t you bring him in?”
46“No one ever spoke the way this man does,” the guards replied.
47“You mean he has deceived you also?” the Pharisees retorted. 48“Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed in him? 49No! But this mob that knows nothing of the law—there is a curse on them.”
50Nicodemus, who had gone to Jesus earlier and who was one of their own number, asked, 51“Does our law condemn a man without first hearing him to find out what he has been doing?”
52They replied, “Are you from Galilee, too? Look into it, and you will find that a prophet does not come out of Galilee.”
[The earliest manuscripts and many other ancient witnesses do not have John 7:53—8:11. A few manuscripts include these verses, wholly or in part, after John 7:36, John 21:25, Luke 21:38 or Luke 24:53.]
Sorry to say but this fatwa failed to convince me that the giver of this fatwa has made a well-informed conclusion. First of all...the fatwa giver never elaborates why believing in evolution is a kufr...he just claims that and continues to explain when someone can be called kafir. Second, evolution is more than only darwinism...the theory has gone through some development after Darwin.
For what İ know, this guy just heard that evolution contradicted İslam...never took the effort to investigate...and just followed blindly what he heard.
Someone with more convincing fatwas? Please share.
Jesus had a biological mother, but Adam did not have a biological mother or father, similar but different.
The following are just my beliefs, so no proof offered. I believe God created all the species separately, once they were created then evolution happened. I do not believe you can use evolution to extrapolate back 4 billion years to single cell life, then use it to explain the complexity of the life we see today.
In the spirit of searching for God,
Eric
Do you not believe that the axolotl contains mysterious signs in terms of fish with limbs and rapid cell regeneration?
The critter looks like something stuck in fetal mode.
Pff this is a very difficult text...i understood only the half of it...the part İ understood...İ could agree with...i will take my time and read this article again. Maybe İ have to reconsider my claim after all.
Thanks for sharing...İ will come back to this later on.
Pff this is a very difficult text...i understood only the half of it...the part İ understood...İ could agree with...i will take my time and read this article again. Maybe İ have to reconsider my claim after all.
Thanks for sharing...İ will come back to this later on.
Actually this article is nonsense. Regarding coherence, what is said here is philosophical nonsense. Of course our observations aren't perfectly objective as optical illusions demonstrate. Regarding logicality, evolution is not hard science, it is what I would call soft science. It is a working hypothesis that has proven to be very useful. Regarding applicability, he complains that evolution isn't smooth over time. But of course successful mutations are rare and the mutation rate may vary of time. So this is hardly an argument against evolution. Regarding Man, the author seems to be telling God how God should behave. The idea that God cannot create Man from clay through evolution is using religious ideology to limit God, which seems contrary to the spirit of the Quran.
When I created this thread, I had assumed that Islam would tolerate both views, both pro-evolution and anti-evolution. But now I see that some Muslims are as closed minded as atheists, believing that only their view is acceptable. This is sad.
Actually this article is nonsense. Regarding coherence, what is said here is philosophical nonsense. Of course our observations aren't perfectly objective as optical illusions demonstrate. Regarding logicality, evolution is not hard science, it is what I would call soft science. It is a working hypothesis that has proven to be very useful. Regarding applicability, he complains that evolution isn't smooth over time. But of course successful mutations are rare and the mutation rate may vary of time. So this is hardly an argument against evolution. Regarding Man, the author seems to be telling God how God should behave. The idea that God cannot create Man from clay through evolution is using religious ideology to limit God, which seems contrary to the spirit of the Quran.
When I created this thread, I had assumed that Islam would tolerate both views, both pro-evolution and anti-evolution. But now I see that some Muslims are as closed minded as atheists, believing that only their view is acceptable. This is sad.
The Quran's view on man's beginning is pretty clear. What is there to discuss?
The Quran's view on man's beginning is pretty clear. What is there to discuss?
define "pretty clear". That Allah created us from dust and clay and we all come from Adam as, might be pretty clear to you. however, it is not that very detailed...so the process behind it is not so pretty clear unfortunately...so there is pretty much to discuss...
I am going to be honost here:
My English is actually pretty good if I may say that about myself, but this article is a level too difficult for me.
like said, I did not understand everything. But for as good as I can, here is my reaction:
part about coherence: I could not follow.
logicality: evolution is not science but more like an interpretation. The evidence for evolution is not that hard because there are still may gaps of intermediate species, so I can understand that the author sees this more like an interpretation than a science...but then again, aren't all theories then more or less interpretations up to a certain degree?
The Rutherford-model and the Bohrmodel are models in an attempt to explain how the electrons behave around a nucleos...but until today, no one has a magnifying device so powerfull to see how an atom exactly looks like. but still the model is usefull and explains occuring phenomenon very well.
applicability: an example of continuous fossil findings where one species slowly transforms into another is the case with moluscs. however, this was in a short period of 3 mln years.
the record shows that transformation is not constant in time...that animals stay much the same for a long period and then rapidly change. within 5000 to 30.000 years.
This sounds pretty logical to me. why would animals change when they do not need to?
Man: The author claims that evolution contradicts Islam regarding humans because Adam as was created in Janna and not on Earth. However, we do not know anything about Janna's location...it can be totally in another dimension and still be on earth on the same time. the law of physics as we know here does not apply on Janna...so it is wrong to say that Janna is in a different place than Earth...and just as wrong to say that Jannah is on Earth...the whole concept of "place" relies on the laws of physics as we know...so, we can not say anything about this.
The part with the "created with his own two hands" I did not understand completely.
The ruh of man is special, a sacred substance...not a part of Allah. this indicates that the creation of man was something special...not to compare with other species...
I can agree with this, but this still does not contradict with what I was saying...apes evolving untill a certain points...then a miracle happens and Adam is being created with slightly different features and with a ruh...so the old "model" can still be used to form Adam as as the new model (without parents) and included a ruh.
Most of the scientists are atheists that believe that God was a creation of man. That might be. But still the theory must be based on objective observations and facts...we can disregard personal statements and claims.
the part that evolutionists believe in that causes bring about effects in and of themselves is also not the case. cause can bring about effects because Allah is allowing that...in no way of themselves.
the example that the bullet gave the president death instead of Allah is not a case that evolution is therefore wrong...it is just an issue that we muslims should be aware of.
Again...cut away the crap like personal statements, claims and preferences...leave the part that can be used.
adequasy:
bits and parts I understood, but not completely.
conclusion:
Again, most of what I understood, I could agree on...some details not, because the given examples still does not contradict with my own view
I too felt that the author was attempting to sound over-sophisticated to the verge of incoherence, it's good to use meaningful words if the clarity outweighs the complication, but that is NOT the result in my opinion. Prob'ly struggled to fit the words himself.
Regarding the fossil transition gap - we have living examples :
With all due respect, what do you mean when you say that it must be falsifiable?
Is it not a conclusion based on observation of what is obviously apparent?
Eg. "This is a white swan" - in contrast to the falsifiable previously held theory "all swans are white".
Or "this is a liger/tigon" in contrast to the theory "it may be a fact that life developed in stages".
I seriously dislike that website. But that article is nothing short of brilliant.
A scientific theory has to be falsifiable for it to to be scientific.
Evolution isn't. Thus, it is not even scientific.
Evolution and Islam
...
Evolution is falsifiable. Just google "evolution falsifiable" and find numerous examples of how evolution could be falsified. The only reason that evolution doesn't qualified as hard science is because it is not EXPERIMENTALLY falsifiable. But evolution is science because it is falsifiable by discovered evidence.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Array
Eric H liked this post
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks