Is human evolution compatible with the quran?

[Abz2000]

Maybe read up on this man of falsehood and treachery who grabbed the collar of Allah's messenger on behalf of the enemies of Allah who only wanted him to preach and confirm what they already accepted - even if he was telling them the truth for Allah's sake and even if some of their previous reasoning was false and irrational. Arrogance and 'asabiyyah al jaahiliyyah do indeed keep people from truth and can lead them to kufr and Allah's displeasure in absence of repentance.

Complements the above videos well too:




67. Narrated Usama bin Zaid
The Prophet rode a donkey having a saddle with a Fadakiyya velvet covering. He mounted me behind him and went to visit Sa`d bin 'Ubada, and that had been before the battle of Badr. The Prophet proceeded till he passed by a gathering in which `Abdullah bin Ubai bin Salul was present, and that had been before `Abdullah embraced Islam. The gathering comprised of Muslims, polytheists, i.e., idolators and Jews. `Abdullah bin Rawaha was also present in that gathering.

When dust raised by the donkey covered the gathering, `Abdullah bin Ubai covered his nose with his upper garment and said, "Do not trouble us with dust." The Prophet greeted them, stopped and dismounted. Then he invited them to Allah (i.e., to embrace Islam) and recited to them some verses of the Holy Qur'an. On that, `Abdullah bin Ubai said, "O man ! There is nothing better than what you say if it is true. Do not trouble us with it in our gathering, but return to your house, and if somebody comes to you, teach him there."

On that `Abdullah bin Rawaha said, Yes, O Allah's messenger! Bring your teachings to our gathering, for we love that."

So the Muslims, the pagans and the Jews started abusing each other till they were about to fight. The Prophet kept on quietening them till they became calm.
Thereupon the Prophet mounted his animal and proceeded till he entered upon Sa`d bin Ubada. He said to him "O Sa`d! Have you not heard what Abu Hubab (i.e., `Abdullah bin Ubai) said?" Sa`d said, 'O Allah's messenger! Excuse and forgive him, for Allah has given you what He has given you. The people of this town (Medina decided unanimously to crown him and make him their chief by placing a turban on his head, but when that was prevented by the Truth which Allah had given you he (`Abdullah bin Ubai) was grieved out of jealously, and that was the reason which caused him to behave in the way you have seen."

http://www.theonlyquran.com/hadith/Sahih-Bukhari/?chapter=70&hadith=549&pagesize=20


وَإِذْ قَالَ مُوسَى لِقَوْمِهِ يَا قَوْمِ لِمَ تُؤْذُونَنِي وَقَد تَّعْلَمُونَ أَنِّي رَسُولُ اللَّهِ إِلَيْكُمْ فَلَمَّا زَاغُوا أَزَاغَ اللَّهُ قُلُوبَهُمْ وَاللَّهُ لَا يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الْفَاسِقِينَ {5
061:005 Khan
:
And (remember) when Musa (Moses) said to his people: "O my people! Why do you hurt me while you know certainly that I am the Messenger of Allah to you? So when they turned away (from the Path of Allah), Allah turned their hearts away (from the Right Path). And Allah guides not the people who are Fasiqun (rebellious, disobedient to Allah).


--------

Hypocrites are not interested to ask the prophet to ask Allah to forgive Them


Allah the Exalted states about the hypocrites, may Allah curse them,
﴿وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمْ تَعَالَوْاْ يَسْتَغْفِرْ لَكُمْ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ لَوَّوْاْ رُءُوسَهُمْ﴾

(And when it is said to them: "Come, so that the Messenger of Allah may ask forgiveness from Allah for you,'' they twist their heads,) meaning, they turn away, ignoring this call in arrogance, belitt- ling what they are invited to. This is why Allah the Exalted said,
﴿وَرَأَيْتَهُمْ يَصُدُّونَ وَهُم مُّسْتَكْبِرُونَ﴾

(and you would see them turning away their faces in pride.) Allah punished them for this behavior, saying,
﴿سَوَآءٌ عَلَيْهِمْ أَسْتَغْفَرْتَ لَهُمْ أَمْ لَمْ تَسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ لَن يَغْفِرَ اللَّهُ لَهُمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ لاَ يَهْدِى الْقَوْمَ الْفَـسِقِينَ ﴾

(It is equal to them whether you ask forgiveness or ask not forgiveness for them, Allah will never forgive them. Verily, Allah guides not the people who are the rebellious.)

As Allah said in Surat Bara'ah, and a discussion preceded there, and here we will present some of the Hadiths reported that are related to it. Several of the Salaf mentioned that this entire passage was revealed in the case of `Abdullah bin Ubay bin Salul, as we will soon mention, Allah willing and our trust and reliance are on Him. In his book, As-Sirah, Muhammad bin Ishaq said, "After the battle of Uhud ended, the Prophet returned to Al-Madinah.

`Abdullah bin Ubay bin Salul -- as Ibn Shihab narrated to me -- would stand up every Friday, without objection from anyone because he was a chief of his people, when the Prophet would sit on the Minbar, just before he delivered the Jumu`ah Khutbah to the people.

`Abdullah bin Ubay would say, `O people! This is the Messenger of Allah with you. Allah has honored us by sending him and gave you might through him. Support him, honor him and listen to and obey him.' He would then sit down.

So after the battle of Uhud, even after he did what he did, that is, returning to Al-Madinah with a third of the army, he stood up to say the same words. But the Muslims held on to his clothes and said to him, `Sit down, O enemy of Allah! You are not worthy to stand after you did what you did.'

`Abdullah went out of the Masjid crossing people's lines and saying, `By Allah, it is as if I said something awful when I wanted to support him.' Some men from Al-Ansar met him at the gate of the Masjid and asked him what happened. He said, `I just stood up to support him and some men, his Companions, jumped at me, pulled me back and admonished me, as if what I said was an awful thing; I merely wanted to support him.' They said to him, `Woe to you! Go back so that Allah's Messenger asks Allah to forgive you.' He said, `By Allah, I do not wish that he ask Allah to forgive me.'''


Qatadah and As-Suddi said, "This Ayah was revealed about `Abdullah bin Ubay. A young relative of his went to Allah's Messenger and conveyed to him an awful statement that `Abdullah said. The Messenger called `Abdullah, who swore by Allah that he did not say anything. The Ansar went to that boy and admonished him. However, Allah sent down what you hear about `Abdullah's case and Allah's enemy was told, `Go to Allah's Messenger,' but he turned his head away, saying that he will not do it.''

Muhammad bin Ishaq said that Muhammad bin Yahya bin Hibban, `Abdullah bin Abi Bakr and `Asim bin `Umar bin Qatadah narrated to him the story of Bani Al-Mustaliq.

They said that while the Messenger of Allah was in that area, Jahjah bin Sa`id Al-Ghifari, a hired hand for `Umar, and Sinan bin Wabr fought over the water source. Sinan called out, "O Ansar'', while Al-Jahjah called, "O Muhajirin!'' Zayd bin Arqam and several Ansar men were sitting with `Abdullah bin Ubay bin Salul at that time. When `Abdullah heard what happened, he said, "They are bothering us in our land. By Allah, the parable of us and these foolish Quraysh men, is the parable that goes, `Feed your dog until it becomes strong, and it will eat you.' By Allah, when we go back to Al-Madinah, the most mighty will expel the weak from it.'' He then addressed his people who were sitting with him, saying to them, "What have you done to yourselves You let them settle in your land and shared your wealth with them. By Allah, if you abandon them, they will have to move to another area other than yours.'' Zayd bin Arqam heard these words and conveyed them to Allah's Messenger . Zayd was a young boy then.
`Umar bin Al-Khattab was with the Messenger and he said, "O Allah's Messenger! Order `Abbad bin Bishr to cut off his head at his neck.'' The Prophet replied,
«فَكَيْفَ إِذَا تَحَدَّثَ النَّاسُ يَا عُمَرُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا يَقْتُلُ أَصْحَابَهُ، لَا، وَلَكِنْ نَادِ يَا عُمَرُ الرَّحِيل»
(What if people started saying that Muhammad kills his companions, O `Umar No. However, order the people to start the journey (back to Al-Madinah).)
When `Abdullah bin Ubay bin Salul was told that his statement reached Allah's Prophet , he went to him and denied saying it. He swore by Allah that he did not utter the statement that Zayd bin Arqam conveyed. `Abdullah bin Ubay was a chief of his people and they said, "O Allah's Messenger! May be the young boy merely guessed and did not hear what was said correctly.'' Allah's Messenger started the journey at an unusual hour of the day and was met by Usayd bin Al-Hudayr, who greeted him acknowledging his prophethood. Usayd said, "By Allah! You are about to begin the journey at an unusual time.'' The Prophet said,
«أَمَا بَلَغَكَ مَا قَالَ صَاحِبُكَ ابْنُ أُبَيَ؟ زَعَمَ أَنَّهُ إِذَا قَدِمَ الْمَدِينَةَ سَيُخْرِجُ الْأَعَزُّ مِنْهَا الْأَذَل»
(Did not the statement of your friend, Ibn Ubay reach you He claimed that when he returns to Al-Madinah, the mighty one will expel the weak one out of it.) Usayd said, "Indeed, you are the mighty one, O Allah's Messenger, and he is the disgraced one.'' Usayd said, "Take it easy with him, O Allah's Messenger! By Allah, when Allah brought you to us, we were about to gather the pearls (of a crown) so that we appoint him king over us. He thinks that you have rid him of his kingship.'' The Messenger of Allah traveled with the people until the night fell, then the rest of the night until the beginning of the next day and then set camp with the people. He wanted to busy them from talking about what had happened. The minute people felt the ground under their feet, they went to sleep and Surat Al-Munafiqin was revealed. Al-Hafiz

Abu Bakr Al-Bayhaqi recorded that Jabir bin `Abdullah said, "We were in a battle with Allah's Messenger and a man from the Emigrants kicked an Ansari man. The Ansari man called out, `O Ansar!' and the Emigrant called out, `O Emigrants!' Allah's Messenger heard that and said,
«مَا بَالُ دَعْوَى الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ؟ دَعُوهَا فَإِنَّهَا مُنْتِنَة»

(What is this call of Jahiliyyah Abandon it because it is offensive.) `Abdullah bin Ubay heard that and said, `Have they (the Emigrants) done so By Allah, if we return to Al-Madinah, surely, the more honorable will expel therefrom the meaner.' The Ansar at that time, were more numerous that the Emigrants when the Messenger of Allah came to Al-Madinah, but later on the Emigrants imcreased in number.

When this statement reached the Prophet , `Umar got up and said, `O Allah's Messenger! Let me chop off the head of this hypocrite!'

The Prophet said:
«دَعْهُ، لَا يَتَحَدَّثُ النَّاسُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا يَقْتُلُ أَصْحَابَه»

(Leave him, lest the people say that Muhammad kills his companions.)''

Imam Ahmad, Al-Bukhari and Muslim collected this Hadith. `Ikrimah and Ibn Zayd and others said that when the Prophet and his Companions went back to Al-Madinah,`Abdullah, the son of `Abdullah bin Ubay bin Salul, remained by the gate of Al-Madinah holding his sword. People passed by him as they returned to Al-Madinah, and then his father came. `Abdullah, son of `Abdullah, said to his father, "Stay where you are,'' and his father asked what the matter was His son said, "By Allah! You will enter through here until the Messenger of Allah allows you to do so, for he is the honorable one and you are the disgraced.'' When the Messenger of Allah came by, and he used to be in the last lines, `Abdullah bin Ubay complained to him about his son and his son said, "By Allah, O Allah's Messenger! He will not enter it until you say so.'' The Messenger gave his permission to `Abdullah bin Ubay and his son said, "Enter, now that the Messenger of Allah gave you his permission.''

In his Musnad, Abu Bakr `Abdullah bin Az-Zubayr Al-Humaydi recorded from Abu Harun Al-Madani that `Abdullah, the son of `Abdullah bin Ubay bin Salul, said to his father, "You will never enter Al-Madinah unless and until you say, `Allah's Messenger is the honorable one and I am the low.'' When the Prophet came, `Abdullah, son of `Abdullah bin Ubay bin Salul said to him, "O Allah's Messenger! I was told that you have decided to have my father executed. By He Who has sent you with Truth, I never looked straight to his face out of respect for him. But if you wish, I will bring you his head, because I would hate to see the killer of my father.''

﴿يأَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ لاَ تُلْهِكُمْ أَمْوَلُكُمْ وَلاَ أَوْلَـدُكُمْ عَن ذِكْرِ اللَّهِ وَمَن يَفْعَلْ ذَلِكَ فَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الْخَـسِرُونَ - وَأَنفِقُواْ مِن مَّا رَزَقْنَـكُمْ مِّن قَبْلِ أَن يَأْتِىَ أَحَدَكُمُ الْمَوْتُ فَيَقُولُ رَبِّ لَوْلا أَخَّرْتَنِى إِلَى أَجَلٍ قَرِيبٍ فَأَصَّدَّقَ وَأَكُن مِّنَ الصَّـلِحِينَ - وَلَن يُؤَخِّرَ اللَّهُ نَفْساً إِذَا جَآءَ أَجَلُهَآ وَاللَّهُ خَبِيرٌ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ ﴾

(9. O you who believe! Let not your properties or your children divert you from the remembrance of Allah. And whosoever does that, then they are the losers.) (10. And spend of that with which We have provided you before death comes to one of you, and he says: "My Lord! If only You would give me respite for a little while, then I should give Sadaqah from my wealth, and be among the righteous.) (11. And Allah grants respite to none when his appointed time comes. And Allah is All-Aware of what you do.)

http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1337&Itemid=119


-------




Abdullah bin Ubay bin Salul (King of Hypocrites) and Zayd ibn Arqam (Young Child)

Lesson 168 – Book of Funerals was delivered on 31st August 2007.


باب: الكَفَنُ لِلمَيّت


Ch. 10 - The shroud for a dead body.

These are detailed notes from part of the lesson taught by Shaykh Riyadh ul Haq where he commented on Hadeeth 645.

This is an incomplete chapter heading. The full chapter heading in the original Saheeh of Imam Bukhari is ‘Chapter of the shroud being of a shirt which is sown or unsown and chapter of one who is buried without a shirt’. The chapter heading given in al tajrid al Sarih doesn’t correspond in any way with the original.


645. عَنِ ابْنِ عُمَرَ رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنْهُمَا:

أَنّ عَبْدَ اللهِ بْنَ أُبَيّ لَمّا تُوُفّيَ, جَاءَ ابْنُهُ إِلَى النّبِيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَقَالَ: يَا رَسُولَ اللهِ, أَعْطِنِي قَمِيصَكَ أُكَفّنْهُ فِيهِ, وَصَلّ عَلَيْهِ, وَاسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُ. فَأَعْطَاهُ النّبِيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَمِيصَهُ, فَقَالَ: (اَذِنِي أُصَلّي عَلَيْهِ). فَاَذَنَهُ, فَلَمّا أَرَادَ أَنْ يُصَلّيَ عَلَيْهِ جَذَبَهُ عُمَرُ رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنْهُ, فَقَالَ: أَلَيْسَ اللهُ نَهَاكَ أَنْ تُصَلّيَ عَلَى المُنَافِقِينَ فَقَالَ: (أَنَا بَيْنَ خِيرَتَيْنَ, قَالَ: (اسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ أَوْ لاَ تَسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ إِنْ تَسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ سَبْعِينَ مَرّةً فَلَنْ يَغْفِرَ اللهُ لَهُمْ)). فَصَلّى عَلَيْهِ, فَنَزَلَتْ: (ولاَ تُصَلّ عَلَى أَحَدٍ مِنْهُمْ ماتَ أَبَدًا). رواه البخاري: 1269


645. Narrated Ibn 'Umar رضى الله عنهما : When 'Abdullâh bin Ubay (the chief of hypocrites) died, his son came to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and said, O Allâh's Messenger, please give me your shirt to shroud him in it, offer his funeral prayer and ask for Allâh's Forgiveness for him. So Allâh's Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم gave his shirt to him and said, Inform me (when the funeral is ready) so that I may offer the funeral prayer. So, he informed him and when the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم intended to offer the funeral prayer, 'Umar رضى الله عنه took hold of his hand and said, Has Allâh not forbidden you to offer the funeral prayer for the hypocrites? The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said, I have been given the choice, for Allâh تعالى says: 'Whether you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم ) ask forgiveness for them (hypocrites), or ask not forgiveness for them ...., (and even) if you ask seventy times for their forgiveness .... Allâh will not forgive them.' (V.9:80) So the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم offered the funeral prayer and on that the revelation came: And never (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم ) pray (funeral prayer) for any of them (i.e. hypocrites) who dies. (V.9:84). (2:359O.B.)

Shaykh Abu Yusuf Riyadh ul Haq translated this hadeeth and then elaborated further upon the literal translated.

Who was Abdullah ibn Ubay Salul?

He was one of the famous persons from the tribe of Khazraj and his full name was Abdullah bin Ubay bin Salul. Salul was the name of his grandmother which is unusual as normally male names are used by Arabs when described as ‘son of…’. He was the leader of Khazraj and was about to be crowned the king of Madinah before the arrival of the Muslims. However, many of the people of the tribe embraced Islam when Rasul (صلى الله عليه وسلم) arrived and he was no longer suitable to rule over the kingdom of Madinah. He was extremely eloquent and very articulate and forceful. He was a very imposing personality and considered to be very handsome. He was tall and broadly built. He was also charming, captivating and of a sweet tongue. He was a natural leader. When the Muslims arrived in Madinah he felt he was robbed of his position, throne and crown. He held great enmity against Rasul (صلى الله عليه وسلم) but because many of his tribe had embraced Islam he felt that the best option would be to embrace Islam and go with the flow. However, he continued to oppose Rasul (صلى الله عليه وسلم) and undermine his authority.

He never missed any opportunity to try and harm Rasul (صلى الله عليه وسلم) and the Muslims. However, when anyone would confront him, he would switch on his charm and say ‘I’m a Muslim’. He would pray salah in the Masjid and sit in the gatherings of Rasul (صلى الله عليه وسلم). Thus, everyone treated him as a Muslim. He became a natural leader and spearhead of the new movement of hypocrisy. There were four different groups in Madinah; Muslims, a number of Arabs who were still non-believers (but they made their disbelief clear), a large Jewish community and fourthly the hypocrites. There is an extensive mention of the hypocrites in the Madani Surats of the Qur’an.

The hypocrites were a lethal group and we can understand this by looking at the beginning of Surah Baqarah for example where Allah praises the believers in 2-3 verses, then mentions the disbelievers in a couple of verses and then there is a large section where Allah mentions the hypocrites. The simple reason for this is because the believers are honest in their belief and the disbelievers are honest in their disbelief. In contrast, the hypocrites are extremely dangerous and deluded. Allah says that they attempt to deceive Allah and the believers but they are not deceiving anyone but themselves. In their delusion, they think they are getting away with everything by fooling the people and even think that they are deceiving Allah.

The Muslims had innumerable problems with the hypocrites. For example, during the battle of Uhud, Rasul (صلى الله عليه وسلم) had instructed everyone to march towards the outskirts of Madinah on a plain under Mount Uhud. The Muslims were going to battle against an army of 3000.

A thousand people travelled from Madinah, from the centre of the city towards the outskirts, towards Uhud in the morning. Abdullah bin Ubay bin Salul was in charge of a large contingent; a very large group. At the very last minute he turned away, just before Uhud, and came back and returned to Madinah with 300 of men. So, the Muslims who had originally set off with a 1000 men to fight a well-prepared enemy of 3000 were now left with just 700 men. This was due to the betrayal of Abdullah ibn Ubay who convinced 300 of the army to turn back and return to Madinah. And after the battle of Uhud, the hypocrites made excuse after excuse. Despite this, the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) tolerated them and humoured them but they left no stone unturned.

http://www.bukhariblog.com/2008/02/abdullah-bin-ubay-bin-salul-king-of.html?m=1

 

[Abz2000]

Interesting to see that some people rely on attempted hit'n'run pieces rather than intellectual discussion or debate, but disappear as soon as rational questions are asked in sincerity....

Anyways, hopefully, since there appear to be no expert scientists or Arabic scholars to post instead of all the "internet scientists and scholars" that constitute the majority of internet forums, we may aswell get back to topic (although the little meander was highly enlightening).

They think that Darwin's theory had missing points but just like every scientific theory this doesnt neccesarily mean the theory was wrong at all. There is evolution theory and Darwin's contribution to it was a milestone. Today we have "modern" evolution theory which is heavily supported by modern genetics and micro-biology which was not the case 150 years ago. However, Darwin's opinions are still influencing the biologists. You can't find any respected biologist in any respected university to deny the ToE as a whole.

So yes, we come from something else which were not human beings once upon a time..And I believe this does not contradict with Islam.

It's the best answer that fits the data, so I can say with certainty that every living being on earth evolved from liquid.
And I can say with certainty that there is no god but God - He has no partners or parents or offspring, and that Muhammad :saws: is God's slave and messenger.

قَالَ قَائِلٌ مِّنْهُمْ إِنِّي كَانَ لِي قَرِينٌ {51
One of them will start the talk and say: "I had an intimate companion (on the earth),

يَقُولُ أَئِنَّكَ لَمِنْ الْمُصَدِّقِينَ {52
"Who used to say, 'are you really from amongst those who bear witness/confirm?

أَئِذَا مِتْنَا وَكُنَّا تُرَابًا وَعِظَامًا أَئِنَّا لَمَدِينُونَ {53
"(That) when we die and become dust and bones, shall we indeed (be raised up) to receive reward or punishment (according to our deeds)?"

قَالَ هَلْ أَنتُم مُّطَّلِعُونَ {54
(It will be) said: "Would yous look down?"

فَاطَّلَعَ فَرَآهُ فِي سَوَاء الْجَحِيمِ {55
So they looked down and saw him in the midst of hellfire.

قَالَ تَاللَّهِ إِنْ كِدتَّ لَتُرْدِينِ {56
He/she said: "By Allah! You nearly ruined me.

وَلَوْلَا نِعْمَةُ رَبِّي لَكُنتُ مِنَ الْمُحْضَرِينَ {57
"Had it not been for the Grace of my Lord, I would certainly have been among those brought forth (to Hell)."

أَفَمَا نَحْنُ بِمَيِّتِينَ {58
So aren't we going to die?

إِلَّا مَوْتَتَنَا الْأُولَى وَمَا نَحْنُ بِمُعَذَّبِينَ {59
"Except our first death, and we shall not be punished?

إِنَّ هَذَا لَهُوَ الْفَوْزُ الْعَظِيمُ {60
Truly, this is the supreme success!

لِمِثْلِ هَذَا فَلْيَعْمَلْ الْعَامِلُونَ {61
For the like of this let the workers work.

From Quran, Chapter 37

Yes but the problem arises when we confuse science with "religion" or ideology or philosophy etc. It is true that ET was used as a means to promote the white supremacy by many people including Darwin's himself. He said that the European white race is more evolved so superior to other races. He was even an anti-Turkist and supported the idea that Turks as a sub evolved people must be eliminated from Europe. Of course this was because of his political views. Nazis used a similar agenda for their Germanic supremacy. But we cant deny the reality just because people confuse scientific theories with other things, even though they are the ones who invented the theory.

It is wrong to discriminate and commit injustice based on racism, Allah :swt: tells us that the best from amongst humankind in Allah's sight are those who have the most taqwa of Allah.


And yeah I would be foolish and wrong to reject pythagoras theorem by putting it down to kufr (denial) since it is denial to categorize truth as denial out of 'asabiyyah and kibr, so I confidently announce that pythagoras theorem is correct.

 

[Zeal]

You may be surprised at how far some creatures have come in learning:

looooool monkeys are clever

 

[DanEdge]

I think liquid chromatography is relevant here in at least one sense: it could be used to test for ego-enhancing drugs in the brains of some discussion participants. Let's not get too full of ourselves here. We're all here to think and learn and ponder and express ourselves. IB is full of intelligent, honest folks, and all benefit. This discussion has degenerated to a very low point, and I hate to see it on IB.

Thanks,

--Dan Edge

 

[DanEdge]

In the spirit of refocusing this topic on friendly debate, I'd like to raise a few issues.

1) To those opposing evolutionary theory, how do you account for the existence of progressively more man-like hominids in recent history? It is often said that man cannot be descended from ape, but this is a claim evolutionsists do not make. Rather, there is a long, documented progression of mammels becoming more and more man-like. For example, the Australopithecus species from about 5 million years ago looks significantly more like man than ape. Homo Habilis, from about 3 million years ago, was the first stone tool user. Homo Erectus, about a million years ago, stood upright and used fire. Neanderthals are genetically proven to be among human ancestry. These are striking facts that must be accounted for in any affirmation or denial of evolutionary theory.

2) Schimi and others have evoked Kant's analytic/synthetic dichotomy in relation to evolution, and I think this is a very interesting point worthy of greater focus. Darwinian evolution, more specifically the theory that natural selection is the primary driver of species adaptation, seems to many to be a scientific theory. But hang on. As others have noted, it's difficult to devise an experiment to prove or disprove this theory. I challenge pro-evolutionists to resolve this conflict according to Karl Popper's standard of Falsifiability. In other words, what experiment could one conduct that would prove Darwinian evolution to be false? In Darwin's time, there were many objections to his theory, one of which (as indicated by Abz) was the complexity of the eye organ. How could natural selection produce such a wonder? Darwin had no scientific answer, only philosophical explanations, and those are still the only answers available for this question. Darwin had to explain away many, many objections which are still unanswered by evidence.

So, I propose challenges to both sides of the debate. Any takers?

--Dan Edge

 

[STN]

I agree with ZeeshanParvez in that you need some knowledge before you go on discussing matters which you don't know completely.

Like that ignorant atheist and what is with these atheists yelling and screaming like "monkeys" (pun intended) like every other video i see of a supposed "discussion" or argument is one-sided with the atheist acting like a rude, asshole who just yells and not give the other opportunity to even make his point.

I don't need to even answer his ignorance, anyone who goes and study the verses he referenced, he will find the context provided you bother to study just one verse before and after the verse that ignorant loves to reference. I hate Donald Trump, because he is a vagina grabbing racist who is spreading hate against Muslims <- Guess what an atheist, islamophobe ignorant would quote in my that statement? (Hint: it would be something like i hate <fill in his country name>) This is the level of intelligence and decency you find in these Kafirs.

Goes for this thread, supposed "intellectuals" discussing things they barely know. Similarity doesn't mean proving it, pigs and humans are more similar - they're even transplanting pigs organs to humans so how did a human not come from a pig?

If evolution is such the truth, why haven't they found a single species changing into another. I have already told you guys of the fast rate of mutations/evolution of micro-organisms, in one year they can go through so many mutations that they can be considered equivalent to a man's million if not billions of years of generations. So why isn't the E.Coli mutating to another organism.

Never any concrete proof, it's the same story with the big bang - so how did big bang happen and where did all those materials come from ? or from 0 because logic went to poop that day.

Abz2000 Humans lived longer and were bigger, do you NOT know about Adam (A.S) ?

 

[STN]

In the spirit of refocusing this topic on friendly debate, I'd like to raise a few issues.

1) To those opposing evolutionary theory, how do you account for the existence of progressively more man-like hominids in recent history? It is often said that man cannot be descended from ape, but this is a claim evolutionsists do not make. Rather, there is a long, documented progression of mammels becoming more and more man-like. For example, the Australopithecus species from about 5 million years ago looks significantly more like man than ape. Homo Habilis, from about 3 million years ago, was the first stone tool user. Homo Erectus, about a million years ago, stood upright and used fire. Neanderthals are genetically proven to be among human ancestry. These are striking facts that must be accounted for in any affirmation or denial of evolutionary theory.

2) Schimi and others have evoked Kant's analytic/synthetic dichotomy in relation to evolution, and I think this is a very interesting point worthy of greater focus. Darwinian evolution, more specifically the theory that natural selection is the primary driver of species adaptation, seems to many to be a scientific theory. But hang on. As others have noted, it's difficult to devise an experiment to prove or disprove this theory. I challenge pro-evolutionists to resolve this conflict according to Karl Popper's standard of Falsifiability. In other words, what experiment could one conduct that would prove Darwinian evolution to be false? In Darwin's time, there were many objections to his theory, one of which (as indicated by Abz) was the complexity of the eye organ. How could natural selection produce such a wonder? Darwin had no scientific answer, only philosophical explanations, and those are still the only answers available for this question. Darwin had to explain away many, many objections which are still unanswered by evidence.

So, I propose challenges to both sides of the debate. Any takers?

--Dan Edge

1. Here is something you probably never knew. Allah (SWT) created other creatures who walked the earth before man such as Jinn, Hinn, Binn, we don't know how they looked like.

And here is something else...some people were disfigured to monkeys and pigs for their disobedience. As science and human knowledge is slowly increasing, we are learning and discovering things that undeniably proof the truth of Holy Quran.
https://islamqa.info/en/14085

Like the story of Haman who the orientalists in their ignorance to lead people astray from Islam said Prophet Muhammad(SAWW) wrote the Qur'an in the light of the Torah and the Gospel (Nauzbillah) also put forth the sophistry that he copied some of the subjects in the Qur'an wrongly but the ridiculousness of this claim became obvious 200 years ago when the Egyptian hieroglyphs were deciphered and the name "Haman" was discovered.

So if anything, it proves the Holy Quran is complete truth.

And there's no doubt that humans change based on their environment, look at the features of Koreans, Chinese (not being a racist, just making a point). Maybe the living conditions in the past were a bit different so they looked different and we certainly know that Adam(A.S) the first man was extremely tall and lived very long. We also don't know how jinns, binns and hinns look(ed) like.

I don't believe in a species jump to be scientifically possible. If it was possible, the micro-organisms with smallest genomes such as 3.2 kb could have evolved to another species. Multi-cellular organism have even a bigger challenge, all the organs need to work in harmony and need an intricate balance, you're telling me that the complex neural network of brain with so much balance was evolved by pure luck and chance ? I can "suppose for argument sake" any other organ could evolve but if you're telling me that the human brain evolved to the intelligence it has now - yeah i can't even imagine it.

I can believe a bacteria evolving to another bacteria though it's very unlikely but that's not what the evolutionist want you to believe. They want you to believe that chemicals became organisms on their own....pretty bold conjecture based on nothing.

Allah(SWT) says

And certainly did We create man from an extract of clay.
- Holy Quran 23:12

That's what i believe.

I find it interesting people blindly believe in evolution without questioning it and realizing it is not proven but when it comes to the extremely important matter of belief in Allah (SWT) even though they can't find a single contradiction in His book Holy Quran, they won't believe.

 

[Hamza Asadullah]

If the discussion in this thread continues to descend into arguing and name calling then it will have to be closed. So please discuss matters in a respectable manner. We must learn to apply the Islamic etiquette of discussion. We do not have to agree on all matters so let us be tolerant to differences of opinion and view and if we feel such a discussion is more harm than good then it s better to refrain partaking in such discussion and threads. Jzk

 

[Abz2000]

[MENTION=41470]STN[/MENTION] please try to avoid mockery and ridicule with the attempted aim of "trump"-ing the argument and provoking egotistic debate unless doing so in response to someone who is practicing such an intellectually bankrupt tactic. Critical readers see through it. It is more constructive and respectable if you state your own honest opinions in line with logic and rationality, this continues the thought process and it is less likely that a person will identify you as a troll bent upon crashing and dispersing a sound intellectual discussion, and will either accept, or reject your opinions based on merit.
Most old timers here know that I too am able to descend into the depths in order to wrestle trolls where necessary and it can get ugly sometimes (though it's almost always entertaining )

Regarding [MENTION=37755]DanEdge[/MENTION] 's reference to my previous thoughts on the eye.
I used to find the possibility of the eye evolving into it's current form too far fetched due to it's complexity, and my observations and thinking were partly restricted by groupthink just as many thinkers in other fields -including the scientific field are often restricted in scope by political groupthink, (many of us know how easily a scientist's credibility is put at risk in the anti-God political climate where religious secularism is extreme, and how the chances of getting one's findings and observations published in an internationally recognized magazine, newspaper, or peer review journal are limited as soon as they mention the concept of a creator - the "G-word" ridicule and egg throwing starts and a genuine intellectual finds it difficult to continue at such low standards of debate unless they're politically savvy and thick skinned, and prepared to sacrifice personal benefits for the sake of truth).
I recognize how the generalizations made with edited biblical vatican type thinking can steer emotions and also how such vast generalizations can create reluctance to think critically from outside the sandbox and/or to speak up, and also (as can be observed from certain comments above) a similar trend exists also in the "opposite" "camp", the method if inducing groupthink is a powerful tool used by certain people with vested interests or egos.

However, I later became more open-minded in my critical thinking process as I read more and more and studied and pondered over the reactions of peoples to their own prophets when the facts contradicted long established ideas within groups, and realized that Islam transcends groupthink when truth is at risk of becoming a victim, actually, nothing has value if it is in opposition to truth (except in genuine rhetorical debate for the sake of argument).
The way I see it, I don't accept the existence of Allah because I think it's a lie which my tribe or group uses as a tool, I accept it because I believe it to be the truth, and if it is the ultimate truth, then there is no logic in shying away from critical thinking and from the acceptance of obvious facts out of fear of losing face, since denial of just truth is the essence of "kufr".
Prophets were ridiculed, mocked, had clods thrown at them, murdered, and tortured - simply because of their adherence to truth - and not because of their adherence to groupthink. Sometimes it was a "me against the world" scenario (although it wasn't really against - but for).

Anyways, back to the eye:
The eye is a sensory organ, and many creatures (including plants) in existence still have sensory organs that combine multiple sensory devices, the more combined they are, the less specialized they usually are.
Taking this observation into account, it is easy to visualize the logical steps involved in compartmentalizing the functions after each had developed to a stage where having two functions in one was detrimental to the health of an essential organ, or when one function was confused or bullied by other functions when it comes to processing in the processing organ now known as the brain. Separating these parts into a team where conflicts of interest threatened to trump over each other illogically through brute capacity is resolved by relegating a separate organ as judge (da brain).
If I can accept that I was once an impure, wiggling, slithering nasty in my dad, then logically, I should be able to accept the possibility that I was fast replaying a long record that took place through the ages.
And when we realize that the survival chances of a single sperm are very, very small, and that of an early stage fetus, and that these chances of failiure slowly descrease throughout progression of the fetus, it is also easy to visualise the hypothesis that the human being is a survivor from amongst many that were similar to it.
And God knows best.

أَوَلَمْ يَرَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا أَنَّ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضَ كَانَتَا رَتْقًا فَفَتَقْنَاهُمَا وَجَعَلْنَا مِنَ الْمَاء كُلَّ شَيْءٍ حَيٍّ أَفَلَا يُؤْمِنُونَ {30
021:030 Khan
:
Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens and the earth were joined together as one united piece, then We parted them? And We have made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?


وَاللَّهُ خَلَقَ كُلَّ دَابَّةٍ مِن مَّاء فَمِنْهُم مَّن يَمْشِي عَلَى بَطْنِهِ وَمِنْهُم مَّن يَمْشِي عَلَى رِجْلَيْنِ وَمِنْهُم مَّن يَمْشِي عَلَى أَرْبَعٍ يَخْلُقُ اللَّهُ مَا يَشَاء إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ {45
024:045 Khan
:
Allah has created every moving (living) creature from water. Of them there are some that creep on their bellies, some that walk on two legs, and some that walk on four. Allah creates what He wills. Verily! Allah is Able to do all things.


Scroll to 7 min, 35 sec in the video below to understand the beginning:

According to the Holy companion Ibn Abbas. The Holy Prophet , when migrated to Madinah, found that the Jews of Madinah used to fast on the 10th day of Muharram. They said that it was the day on which the Holy Prophet Musa (Moses) and his followers crossed the Red Sea miraculously and the Pharaoh was drowned in its water.

On hearing this from the Jews, the Holy Prophet said, “We are more closely related to Musa than you” and directed the Muslims to fast on the day of Ashurah. (Abu Dawood)

It is also reported in a number of authentic traditions that in the beginning, fasting on the day of Ashurah was obligatory for the Muslims.

It was later that the fasts of Ramadan were made obligatory and the fast on the day of ”Ashurah was made optional. Sayyidah Aishah has said:

“When the Holy Prophet came to Madinah, he fasted on the day of Ashurahh and directed the people to fast it. But when the fasts of Ramadan were made obligatory, the obligation of fasting was confined to Ramadan and the obligatory nature of the fast of Ashurah was abandoned. One can fast on this day, if he so wills, or can avoid fasting, if he so wills.”

However, the Holy Prophet used to fast on the day of Ashurah even after the fasting in Ramadan was made obligatory.


https://www.sia.org.za/quran/31

The way I see it, the sword of truth is more powerful and potent in the hands of those who are truthful - even if a liar discovered how it's made, so don't expect me to drop it through emotional ridicule and mockery, I am able to see past it.

 

[ZeeshanParvez]

@STN please try to avoid mockery and ridicule with the attempted aim of "trump"-ing the argument and provoking egotistic debate unless doing so in response to someone who is practicing such an intellectually bankrupt tactic. Critical readers see through it. It is more constructive and respectable if you state your own honest opinions in line with logic and rationality, this continues the thought process and it is less likely that a person will identify you as a troll bent upon crashing and dispersing a sound intellectual discussion, and will either accept, or reject your opinions based on merit.
Most old timers here know that I too am able to descend into the depths in order to wrestle trolls where necessary and it can get ugly sometimes (though it's almost always entertaining )

Last time I checked this was an Islamic forum. If not then the mods can remind me as I have no time to spend on a Non-Islamic forum. Until they do so I will consider it an Islamic forum.

And if this is an Islamic forum rationality and logic - human flawed logic - have no place. Had our Diin been based on logic we would have wiped under the leather socks and not over them.

You "wrestle" trolls? Really, what are you an online, virtual gangster? Let me give you a psychological analysis of who you are. Your posts show that you are a man who thinks very highly of himself. You have taken the follow the truth even if it means you are against the world mentality and combined it with the I know it all to pose yourself as someone intelligent.

The fact is that when presented by the foundations of this Diin you find yourself on shaky grounds. You choose to talk about a theory propagated by an ex-Monk who refused to believe in God after his daughter died because he did not believe that a Merciful God could take the life of his child. The theory is a farce. It has no basis in the Qur'aan or the Sunnah. You will not find a single Verse or a Hadith which supports this joke you seem to think is the truth. The theory was discussed by Aristotle and his Jaahil disgusting Greeks. The classical scholars were well aware of the writing of the Greeks but gave it no credence because they knew it was a way of the kaafir to explain his existence without having to believe in Allaah.

What you are guilty of by trying to justify this disgusting theory and claiming that this is possible and that is possible which is lying upon Allaah. The moment you attribute things to Allaah without solid proofs you are working on conjecture and lying upon Him. You need to stop.

Allaah says in the Qur'aan:

And who is more unjust than one who invents about Allah a lie or denies His verses? Indeed, the wrongdoers will not succeed.

[Qur'aan 6:21]

If you are a Muslim you do not interject your personal opinions into Diin or say Allaah did this or that unless explicit proof. Your failure to abide by this principle shows you have no clue of the sanctity of Islaam. You will not find a single classical scholar who accepted this barbaric theory of atheists. The scholars of ahl al-Sunnah are agreed that it is a theory of the kufr which has no place in Islaam. The only one causing discord among the unity of Muslims are the kaafirs and those who support their materialistic ideologies like you and try to say Allaah might have done this or might have done that. Islam is not about conjectures. It is about explicit evidence. Evolution is a farce and so are those who support it.

Do yourself, and those who you will influence by your misguided views, a favor. Learn Diin first. Then speak. That is the way of any intelligent being. You learn first. Then you discuss.

- - - Updated - - -

For those sincere Muslims who follow the Qur'aan, Sunnah, Salaf, and classical scholars please do not get deluded by the nonsense of those who support this kufr ideology. Read.

Is Yasir Qadhi’s view of evolution valid according to scholars:Here is a summary of what he said: Qadhi, on the other hand, accepted all of evolution except where it applies to humans. However, he conceded that the “maximum we can go” from an Islamic theological perspective is to say that God inserted Adam in the natural order. To explain his position, he used the example of dominos. He asserted that Adam was the last domino placed directly by God. From his perspective, believers would see this last domino as a miracle of God, whereas non-believers would see a causal connection from all the other dominos. This way, the miracle of Adam is preserved theologically. I read that close analysis of the quran shows that is this view is not compatible, what are thoughts on this?



A: His research is just speculation and guesswork, and perhaps he is suffering from a type of inferiority complex. We do not have to believe in his fabricated theory and leave out the Qur’aan and hadeeth. There were many people before him who also tried to have an apologetic approach with western scholars and secularists. Perhaps he has considered these secular materialists to be his standard and he is striving to be with them. May Allah Ta`ala save us and the ummat from this type of mulhideen and corrupt people.
And Allah Ta’ala (الله تعالى) knows best.

Answered by:
Mufti Ebrahim Salejee

Source

http://islamqa.org/hanafi/darululoomtt/52189/the-theory-of-evolution


Additional reading

http://islamqa.org/hanafi/darululoomtt/52189/the-theory-of-evolution

 

[Abz2000]

I will ignore your condescending remarks which show a high level of weakness and a low level of yaqeen - not because I am unable to respond with like, but because I don't want to make it easy for trolls to get beneficial threads shut down simply by starting a b#tching contest whenever the truth of Islam begins to prevail over taqleed of ancestors, and a sifting, divergence, and distinction process begins from the people of the book, and the best way I will be able to avoid such a scenario is by arguing points based on merit.
As to what follows...

...Islam, the religion of Ibraheem :saws: is based on rationality and logic, it is not simply a religion of the forefathers regardless of truth. It is not my deen because it was my father's deen, it is my deen because i accept it as the truth, and i accept it as the truth because i use rationality and logic, so it is not the case that I will now carve and cut truth like an idol to fit in the pockets of my father, I don't worship Islam, i worship Allah :swt: , and that is because I come via logic and rational thinking that Allah is the truth, and that He is supreme over donald trump and all the other scholars that one can ever name.
That is how a person arrives at yaqeen.

Next I will come to the scholars, I will not disrespect them just in order to argue a point since I believe most of them were sincere, but I will throw your own earlier argument back at you when I say that the scholars of the tenth century were not experts in biology or chromatography and didn't have access to the information small children now have, and therefore hadn't the credentials or the authority to deny such a statement just as the scientusts and scholars of banee israeel 3, 000 years ago didn't have the authority to deny that the earth is a globe, although I don't blame them for being defensive of what they mistakenly interpreted Allah :swt: as having implied, I do blame them for what they wrote falsely into the book of Allah with the aim of getting the book of Allah to confirm their misconceptions.
But then, I don't worship scholars either and neither did any of the Prophets.
I worship Allah who gave me a brain, and I accept Muhamnad :saws: as Allah's messenger not because my dad told told me or because a scholar told me, but because my rationality and reason point me to a position where I am unable to deny them,.
If I followed the deen of my forefathers, then I would have called uzair the son of Allah and Jesus the son of Allah (and also his own father :facepalm: ) if I had been born into a christian family and had christian scholars.

Kitaab At-Tawheed, Chapter: 36

Whoever Obeys a Scholar or a Ruler by Prohibiting What Allah Has Permitted or Permitting What Allah Has Prohibited Has Taken Them as Partners Beside Allah
Ibn `Abbas (ra) said: "Stones are about to rain down upon you from the sky: I say to you: "Allah's Messenger said..." and you reply: "But Abu Bakr and `Umar said...?" 1
Because obedience is a form of worship, it is not allowed to obey anyone - be he man or jinn - unless it conforms with obedience to Allah and His Messenger . This is why Ibn `Abbas (ra) repudiated those who, when they were informed that the Prophet had pronounced upon a matter, objected that Abu Bakr As-Siddeeq and `Umar Ibn Al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with them both) 2 had said something different, thus, in effect, preferring the opinions of these two pious Companions over the Revelation of Allah . This incident allegedly occurred during a discussion about Hajj in which Ibn `Abbas (ra) mentioned something which he had heard from Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah . Ibn `Abbas (ra) warned them of Allah's approaching punishment and His Anger for those who preferred the opinions of Abu Bakr and `Umar (may Allah be pleased with them) to the guidance of Allah's Messenger . - In view of this, what may be said of those who prefer the opinions of lesser men over the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Prophet . 3
Benefits Derived From This Narration

1. Evidence of the virtue of Ibn `Abbas and his excellent understanding of religious matters.
2. That no opinion which contradicts the Qur'an and Sunnah is to be given heed, no matter from whom it emanated.
3. The obligation to be angry for Allah and His Messenger's sake.
Relevance of This Narration to the Subject of the Chapter and to the Subject of Tawheed
That the narration proves that Ibn `Abbas (ra) held that it is forbidden to prefer the opinion of any of Allah's creatures over the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah and this is because to do so is an act of Shirk since it constitutes obedience to other than Allah .
..ooOOoo..

Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal said: "I am amazed at those people who know that a sanad is authentic and yet, in spite of this, they follow the opinion of Sufyan, for Allah (ra), says:
" Let those who oppose his [the Messenger's] commandment beware, lest some fitnah befall them or a painful torment be inflicted on them" (Qur'an 24:63)

So I accept my chain of comnand through rationality and logic to be Allah first, Muhammad as his most authoritative Messenger, and any other piece of information that logically fits together into a matrix of truth in my God-given brain. If I accepted flawed scientific statements from scholars despite the irrationality, I would be condemned as having a God-damned brain.

On the authority of `Adi Ibn Hatim (ra), it is reported that he heard the Messenger of Allah reciting this Qur'anic verse:
" They have taken their rabbis and their monks as lords beside Allah and [they take as a lord] Al-Maseeh, `Eesaa, the son of Maryam, yet they were not commanded but to worship One God: None has the right to be worshipped but He - Praise and Glory to Him: [Far is He] from having the partners they associate [withHim]" (Qur'an 9:31)
"...and I said to him : "We don't worship them." He said: "Do they not forbid what Allah has permitted and do you not then forbid it (to yourselves), and do they not make permissible for you what Allah has forbidden, and do you not then make it permissible (to yourselves)?" I replied: "Certainly!" He said: "That is worshipping them." (Narrated by At-Tirmizi, who graded it as Hasan)
`Adi Ibn Hatim informs us in this Hadith, that when he heard the Prophet reciting Allah's Words:
" They have taken their rabbis and their monks as lords beside Allah. And [they take as their lord] Al-Maseeh, `Eesaa, the son of Maryam" (Qur'an 9:31)
He contradicted the Prophet , saying that they do not worship them; for to his mind, what was meant by worship was bowing, prostration, supplication, sacrifice etc. But the Prophet informed him that their obedience to the rabbbis and monks in forbidding the permissible and permitting the forbidden was a form of worship, because they have thus made their rabbis and monks partners to Allah in obedience and in ordaining the Law.

130. And who turns away from the religion of Abraham but such as debase their souls with folly? Him We chose and rendered pure in this world: And he will be in the Hereafter in the ranks of the Righteous.
131. Behold! his Lord said to him: "Bow (thy will to Me):" He said: "I bow (my will) to the Lord and Cherisher of the Universe."
132. And this was the legacy that Abraham left to his sons, and so did Jacob; "Oh my sons! Allah hath chosen the Faith for you; then die not except in the Faith of Islam."
133. Were ye witnesses when death appeared before Jacob? Behold, he said to his sons: "What will ye worship after me?" They said: "We shall worship Thy Allah and the Allah of thy fathers, of Abraham, Isma'il and Isaac,- the one (True) Allah. To Him we bow (in Islam)."
134. That was a people that hath passed away. They shall reap the fruit of what they did, and ye of what ye do! Of their merits there is no question in your case!
135. They say: "Become Jews or Christians if ye would be guided (To salvation)." Say thou: "Nay! (I would rather) the Religion of Abraham the True, and he joined not gods with Allah."
136. Say ye: "We believe in Allah, and the revelation given to us, and to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses and Jesus, and that given to (all) prophets from their Lord: We make no difference between one and another of them: And we bow to Allah (in Islam)."
137. So if they believe as ye believe, they are indeed on the right path; but if they turn back, it is they who are in schism; but Allah will suffice thee as against them, and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing.
138. (Our religion is) the Baptism of Allah. And who can baptize better than Allah. And it is He Whom we worship.
139. Say: Will ye dispute with us about Allah, seeing that He is our Lord and your Lord; that we are responsible for our doings and ye for yours; and that We are sincere (in our faith) in Him?
140. Or do ye say that Abraham, Isma'il Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes were Jews or Christians? Say: Do ye know better than Allah. Ah! who is more unjust than those who conceal the testimony they have from Allah. but Allah is not unmindful of what ye do!
141. That was a people that hath passed away. They shall reap the fruit of what they did, and ye of what ye do! Of their merits there is no question in your case:
142. The fools among the people will say: "What hath turned them from the Qibla to which they were used?" Say: To Allah belong both east and West: He guideth whom He will to a Way that is straight.
143. Thus, have We made of you an Ummat justly balanced, that ye might be witnesses over the nations, and the Messenger a witness over yourselves; and We appointed the Qibla to which thou wast used, only to test those who followed the Messenger from those who would turn on their heels (From the Faith). Indeed it was (A change) momentous, except to those guided by Allah. And never would Allah Make your faith of no effect. For Allah is to all people Most surely full of kindness, Most Merciful.

From Quran, Chapter

https://i.imgur.com/b8VBzCE.jpg


https://i.imgur.com/C7fJJk1.jpg


https://i.imgur.com/xbVfhHs.jpg


One must let go of their irrational ego to find the truth, Islam is not limited by scholars because it is the magnificent and vast fountain of truth from Allah :swt: Himself. And Allah is NOT false.

The previous posts have been cohesive and well responded to despite the differences so they can be left for readers to think about themselves, some situations require a person's credibility to be questioned - especially in positions of trust. Since this is not a case of trust but of opinion for each person to ponder over, there is no requirement for personal attacks and attempts to put one down in order to discredit their opinion or statement, therefore I will ask brother hamza to look into the merits of any future posts without replying to them myself if there are any personal attacks made by insecure people, and humbly request that he avoids closing beneficial threads and thereby gives anybody the excuse to get a thread they don't like closed just by beginning a b#tching contest.

Think for yourselves.

 

[DanEdge]

But E. coli has been shown to evolve. Researches have studied 66,000+ generations and are directly observing the evolution.

--Dan Edge

 

[Abz2000]

But E. coli has been shown to evolve. Researches have studied 66,000+ generations and are directly observing the evolution.

--Dan Edge

That's apparently too scientific for me, so I'll let the comatogrophic scholars or whatever comment
although I do know that tigons and ligers exist, now those are distinct species of cat, and even they can have liligers.

Species less distinct and more in between shouldn't have much of an issue going at it like cats but not dogs, although wolves and certain dogs apparently bred into wolves are called wolf dogs.

No wonder a shiver goes down my spine when I see eels.

The fertility of hybrid big cat females is well documented across a number of different hybrids. This is in accordance with Haldane's rule: in hybrids of animals whose sex is determined by sex chromosomes, if one sex is absent, rare or sterile, it is the heterogametic sex (the one with two different sex chromosomes e.g. X and Y).

According to Wild Cats of the World (1975) by C. A. W. Guggisberg, ligers and tigons were long thought to be sterile: in 1943, a fifteen-year-old hybrid between a lion and an 'Island' tiger was successfully mated with a lion at the Munich Hellabrunn Zoo. The female cub, though of delicate health, was raised to adulthood.[18]

In September 2012, the Russian Novosibirsk Zoo announced the birth of a "liliger", which is the offspring of a liger mother and a lion father. The cub was named Kiara.[19]


A wolfdog (also called a wolf–dog hybrid or wolf hybrid) is a canid hybrid resulting from the hybridization of a domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris) to one of four other Canis sub-species, the gray (Canis lupus), eastern timber (Canis lycaon), red (Canis rufus), and Ethiopian wolves (Canis simensis).

 

[noraina]

Assalamu alaykum,

Just my two pennies here,

We all know that the Prophet Adam :as: was 60 cubits tall, that is around 27 metres subhanAllah. Since that time, our bone structure and stature has changed an enormous amount, we're not even 2 metres tall now. A modern human looks very different from how humans looked at the times of the ancient Prophets such as Adam :as:.

I don't believe in the theory of evolution. The Prophet Adam :as: was the first man, and he was created from clay by Allah swt and then sent to earth. Khalas. There isn't anything more to it. However, it is true that as humans we have changed, or 'adapted' I suppose you could say. And many living organisms have changed and adapted significantly over a period of time. But evolving from one species to another? No.

The fossil record of 'primitive humanoids' is 'incomplete' - or so that's what scientists who are proponents of ToE believe. The theory of evolution has numerous holes in it, and one is that as of yet no fossil as ever been discovered of the 'missing link' between a humanoid-like creature to a contemporary human. There is simply no evidence of these transitional forms that should have come about if one species developed into another, anything found has been relatively well-defined and even if they are somewhat similar, they have still been very much separate. The fossil record itself, cited as the ToE's most reliable evidence, actually goes some way in refuting this theory. They may think it's complete, but maybe that's all there is. Maybe searching for this missing link is just a wold goose chase.

It seems to me that proponents of ToE try to fit the evidence to the theory rather than the other way around. Putting all assumptions side, the fossil records of not just humanoids but other creatures indicate that these life forms came kind of spontaneously, rather than gradually.

And as for an explanation of these humanoid-like creatures themselves, I remember I was once told that it may have been before mankind was on the earth, it was inhabited by these creatures (who weren't human), just as it had been inhabited by dinosaurs a long time ago, and it is there fossils that we find today and assume it signifies a 'connection'. We simply do not know decisively what we inherited the earth from....I don't know if this is supported by Islamic sources but it is something to consider.

And Allah swt knows best.

 

[ZeeshanParvez]

I will ignore your condescending remarks which show a high level of weakness and a low level of yaqeen - not because I am unable to respond with like, but because I don't want to make it easy for trolls to get beneficial threads shut down simply by starting a b#tching contest whenever the truth of Islam begins to prevail over taqleed of ancestors, and a sifting, divergence, and distinction process begins from the people of the book, and the best way I will be able to avoid such a scenario is by arguing points based on merit.
As to what follows...

...Islam, the religion of Ibraheem :saws: is based on rationality and logic, it is not simply a religion of the forefathers regardless of truth. It is not my deen because it was my father's deen, it is my deen because i accept it as the truth, and i accept it as the truth because i use rationality and logic, so it is not the case that I will now carve and cut truth like an idol to fit in the pockets of my father, I don't worship Islam, i worship Allah :swt: , and that is because I come via logic and rational thinking that Allah is the truth, and that He is supreme over donald trump and all the other scholars that one can ever name.
That is how a person arrives at yaqeen.

The hallmark of a narcissist is he loves himself and uses the word I all the time. Given how many times you use that pronoun and are deluded to think you have a truth which escaped all the classical scholars - despite the fact that you cannot even understand the Primary Texts in the language they were revealed in - makes you fit the description perfectly.

You haven't arrived at any truth. All that has happened is that you have adopted a kufr ideology and the devil has made your deeds seem good to you. I assume you have read the Qur'aan with translation enough to remember those Verses.

And it is not that you don't want to respond, it is that you cannot because the ahl al-Sunnah agrees that evolution is a farce. This Ummah is not united upon error.

A single man can be on error. A select few can.
​

I guess we know the "truth" you believe - mutations which are bad by nature led to a beautiful creation as we see it - is nothing more than the devil deceiving you and interjecting into the Word of Allaah that which is not true.

Next I will come to the scholars, I will not disrespect them just in order to argue a point since I believe most of them were sincere, but I will throw your own earlier argument back at you when I say that the scholars of the tenth century were not experts in biology or chromatography and didn't have access to the information small children now have, and therefore hadn't the credentials or the authority to deny such a statement just as the scientusts and scholars of banee israeel 3, 000 years ago didn't have the authority to deny that the earth is a globe, although I don't blame them for being defensive of what they mistakenly interpreted Allah :swt: as having implied, I do blame them for what they wrote falsely into the book of Allah with the aim of getting the book of Allah to confirm their misconceptions.
But then, I don't worship scholars either and neither did any of the Prophets.

Well, you are not expert in the Qur'aan or the Sunnah. Hence, for you to claim this farce of a theory has any basis in either of the two or is compatible with them is rejected on the same grounds. You lack the knowledge and are wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

But E. coli has been shown to evolve. Researches have studied 66,000+ generations and are directly observing the evolution.

--Dan Edge

You are an agnostic. I never reply to Non-Muslims. However, you have brought up a point which may be used by Muslims to argue their position. So, I will respond to that and not you because as I said what you believe and choose to live with with does not make me lose any sleep.

The Dajjaal will come. He will have the fire in one hand and water in another. He will claim to be the Lord and will show you "proofs" that he is. Then it will be a test for the believers to not look at what is apparent and base their decisions on faith that he is a liar as has been told.

The world is a deception. What appears to be is not always what it is. Given the flawed nature of human "logic" and "rationality" things you see and think to be something are not always trusted.

What is trusted is the Qur'aan and the Sunnah.

There is no evidence of evolution in either. We Muslims do not attribute to Allaah and His Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) mere conjecture.

For all those who have such faith in evolution and the mutations that led to it, how about I give all of you a du'a that you have mutated offspring as we might all be set up for future flash and supermen!

 

[Abz2000]

- - - Updated - - -





Salman Hameed

A high-quality debate of a sensitive topic did not disappoint, as all panellists bar one accepted the scientific consensus

Friday 11 January 2013 09.59 GMT First published on Friday 11 January 2013 09.59 GMT

An imam of an east London mosque, Usama Hasan, received a death threat for arguing in support of human evolution two years ago. On Saturday, London played host to a riveting intrafaith dialogue on Islam's stance on the theory of evolution. The east London imam was one of the speakers – but this time there were others who shared his viewpoint.

The event, organised by the Deen Institute, was titled Have Muslims Misunderstood Evolution? The speakers included an evolutionary biologist, a biological anthropologist, two theologians and a bona fide creationist.

It lasted seven hours, yet almost everyone stayed till the end. There were more than 850 people in the audience and even though the topic was sensitive and controversial, there was no heckling or disruption. At least from my limited interactions, it seemed that the audience was comprised mostly of young professionals. Most had no strong opinion, but their interest was evident as they were willing to spend their entire Saturday hearing about Muslim positions on evolution.

They were not disappointed.

Conversations at events such as these are often derailed by the unscientific rhetoric and common misconceptions of creationists. The success of this event related to the fact that all panellists, with the exception of a creationist, more or less accepted the scientific consensus on evolution. This allowed the discussion to centre on the question: can Muslims reconcile human evolution with their faith?

I think it is important for Muslims (and non-Muslims) to know that there are Muslim scientists who not only understand evolution, but have also thought about its implications for their own personal religious beliefs. Ehab Abouheif is an evolutionary biologist who holds the Canada research chair at McGill University and works on ant evolution. He laid out the scientific case for biological evolution and spoke about the need for Muslims to understand this bedrock principle of modern biology. He used the example of his own personal faith to counter the misconception that one cannot reconcile evolution with Islam.

Fatimah Jackson, an African American convert to Islam, is professor of biological anthropology at the University of North Carolina. Her research focuses on anthropological genetics and human biological and biocultural variability. She knew and taught evolution before her conversion to Islam in the 1970s and has never considered the two to be in conflict. She took the position that science only tells us "how" things happen, and not "why".

Both Abouheif and Jackson are outstanding researchers who accept the mainstream scientific view on evolution. They are excited about their work and unwavering in defence of their faith. They are role models for any budding Muslim scientist.

The London event also featured a theological debate between Usama Hasan and Shaykh Yasir Qadhi. Hasan is a fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society and is the imam who was threatened two years ago for his support for human evolution. He reiterated his position and argued that there was indeed room in Islamic theology to accommodate human evolution.

Qadhi, on the other hand, accepted all of evolution except where it applies to humans. However, he conceded that the "maximum we can go" from an Islamic theological perspective is to say that God inserted Adam in the natural order. To explain his position, he used the example of dominos. He asserted that Adam was the last domino placed directly by God. From his perspective, believers would see this last domino as a miracle of God, whereas non-believers would see a causal connection from all the other dominos. This way, the miracle of Adam is preserved theologically.

The high quality of scientific and theological discussion exposed the shallowness of Islamic creationists, such as Harun Yahya. One of his acolytes, Oktar Babuna, presented his arguments from Istanbul, via the internet. He kept on pointing to fossils as evidence that species have never changed in history. He also discounted any historical changes in the DNA. Babuna's arguments were countered earlier on by both Abouheif and Jackson. But he unintentionally served as a comic relief, when the audience realised that after several hours of discussion, almost all of his responses included the mention of "fossils", irrespective of the topic of discussion.

Babuna aside, this was a serious debate on an important topic. The rejection of evolution in the face of scientific consensus stands as a Galileo moment for Islam. However, the tone of the debate and the quality of intellectual exchange at the London event is encouraging and it shows modern Muslims have the maturity to address a perceived challenge from a scientific idea.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2013/jan/11/muslim-thought-on-evolution-debate

- - - Updated - - -

I hope the mods discipline the uncivilized imbecile on this thread before I am forced to respond.

 

[STN]

@STN please try to avoid mockery and ridicule with the attempted aim of "trump"-ing the argument and provoking egotistic debate unless doing so in response to someone who is practicing such an intellectually bankrupt tactic. Critical readers see through it. It is more constructive and respectable if you state your own honest opinions in line with logic and rationality, this continues the thought process and it is less likely that a person will identify you as a troll bent upon crashing and dispersing a sound intellectual discussion, and will either accept, or reject your opinions based on merit.
Most old timers here know that I too am able to descend into the depths in order to wrestle trolls where necessary and it can get ugly sometimes (though it's almost always entertaining )

My post was in response to the two videos you posted about a "radical" muslim being owned by a british man(atheist) who was calling Islam bad names out of ignorance fed by the media and anti-Islamic sites. Why would i go on a rage about members here who have been nothing but normal in this thread and i also don't see any trolls here so not sure who you're referring to.
As far as Donald Trump is concerned, you can google and find what i used as a rather bad example is actually true.

But E. coli has been shown to evolve. Researches have studied 66,000+ generations and are directly observing the evolution.

--Dan Edge

66,000+ generations? Dan, you can see "evolution" or more accurately mutations in two to three generations and sexual conjugation in very few generations (i don't have an exact figure) when "interesting" genes are present and a viable F- (recipient) bacterium is available for horizontal gene transfer to confer advantage to a population. When conditions are harsh and the bacteria are met with a challenge, they mutate...they mutate like their life depends on it and this is the reason antibiotic resistance exists.

This isn't something new or unknown? What's your point. I said evolve to another species, not a sub-species...a new species, a different species. I told you the evolutionists aren't saying monkeys evolved to sub-species...no they're saying they made the jump to a human...a monkey like human but a human nonetheless.

The experiment is also isolated and not in a natural environment. There is no competition from other micro and macro-organisms, there is no natural famine/deprivation of resources. The conditions are ideal for mutation but bacteria aren't that lucky, they go into hardened spore form naturally and become dormant. There are so many factors they're ignoring which will make evolution to another species if it ever happened unable to survive the harsh competition and environment.

But 66,000+ generations and no sub-species, the amount of mutations bacteria go through safely in that much generations...humans can't and do NOT because we get cancer or tumors and disgusting genetic disorders. We can't evolve to confer resistance against Malaria which has been a genetic burden on us for centuries.

I'll repeat it again - mutation and evolution to a new species are different things. But i'll suppose for sake of argument that bacteria can evolve to another species but no way that a multi-cellular complex organism can evolve to another species without any disastrous effects. Do you know how cancer happens?

@Abz2000

Hybrid animals isn't evolution and look at the fate of hybrid animals. Sterility. Look at mules...the best known hybrid animal. You know why this happens ? Chromosomes and their pairing.

but what is your point? Humans are hybrid of monkeys and what ?

- - - Updated - - -

@Abz2000 @ZeeshanParvez Come on brothers, Shaytaan must be happy seeing you two fight.

I know i get in rage mode but you guys are taking this too far. Go and ask Allah for forgiveness and remove this bitterness.

You both seem intelligent, smart people so what the hell! =) Let's go back to discussing and arguing our points without calling each other names. And to think i was rude in my first post

 

[Aisha]

Thread under review.