Islam Islam and Evolution

[mindlight]

The only two countries to have banned evolution from classrooms have been Turkey and Saudia Arabia

Passions flare as Turkey excludes evolution from textbooks - BBC News

Like most Christians historically Muslims are Creationists. By this I mean that they believe God created the universe and the first man and woman.

What exactly is the Muslim view on evolution? How does it contrast with Young Earth Creationism or Theistic Evolution? Are these Muslim countries actually honouring God in their education systems better than many socalled Christian countries.

If Adam and Eve are special creations then who did their children marry according to Islam?

 

[Catherineanne]

The only two countries to have banned evolution from classrooms have been Turkey and Saudia Arabia

Passions flare as Turkey excludes evolution from textbooks - BBC News

Like most Christians historically Muslims are Creationists. By this I mean that they believe God created the universe and the first man and woman.

What exactly is the Muslim view on evolution? How does it contrast with Young Earth Creationism or Theistic Evolution? Are these Muslim countries actually honouring God in their education systems better than many socalled Christian countries.

If Adam and Eve are special creations then who did their children marry according to Islam?

Ignoring scientific knowledge doesn't honour God.

Islam was for centuries the world leader in knowledge; mathematics, astronomy, science of all kinds. It was centuries ahead of the West and Islamic scholars were second to none. That is no longer the case; very much the opposite.

What we find in any faith where fundamentalism takes over from proper scientific rigour is that the progress of knowledge first of all slows, then stops, and then goes backwards. Turkey and Saudi are now going backwards, and they are not the only ones; parts of the US are heading the same way.

Anti-intellectual fundamentalism is a lazy substitute for actual academic study, proper peer reviewed papers and scientific rigour. It is not something to welcome, on any level.

Emulate that? Honour God by disdaining knowledge? Good grief; what a truly appalling thought.

 

[fatboys]

Ignoring scientific knowledge doesn't honour God.

Islam was for centuries the world leader in knowledge; mathematics, astronomy, science of all kinds. It was centuries ahead of the West and Islamic scholars were second to none. That is no longer the case; very much the opposite.

What we find in any faith where fundamentalism takes over from proper scientific rigour is that the progress of knowledge first of all slows, then stops, and then goes backwards. Turkey and Saudi are now going backwards, and they are not the only ones; parts of the US are heading the same way.

Anti-intellectual fundamentalism is a lazy substitute for actual academic study, proper peer reviewed papers and scientific rigour. It is not something to welcome, on any level.

Emulate that? Honour God by disdaining knowledge? Good grief; what a truly appalling thought.

Do you believe this is true and is the reason that little if any progress was made during the Middle Ages where Christianity controlled much of the world?

 

[Catherineanne]

Do you believe this is true and is the reason that little if any progress was made during the Middle Ages where Christianity controlled much of the world?

There was progress made in the Middle Ages, but knowledge can always only build on what is already known.

It is very weird kind of thinking that takes what is already known and rejects it simply because it was not known 2000 or 1500 years earlier. That is simply nonsensical thinking.

Christianity did not control much of the world in the Middle Ages, however. That happened during the period known as Early Modern.

 

[mindlight]

Ignoring scientific knowledge doesn't honour God.

There are no repeatable experiments that definitively prove evolution. The theory is formulated on the basis of analogous rationalisations based on what can be proven scientifically. So honestly speaking Erdogan is right the theory is controversial and should be seen as such.

Islam was for centuries the world leader in knowledge; mathematics, astronomy, science of all kinds. It was centuries ahead of the West and Islamic scholars were second to none. That is no longer the case; very much the opposite.

Actually Islams so called Golden Age was also more to do with the inherited benefits of Byzantine Christian scholars and the conquest of various empires and cultures with which there had not previously been a free exchange of ideas than it had to do with anything innovative about Islam. As you say Islam lags poorly and no Muslim country is the top 30 list for Nobel prize winners. Of course none of that would matter if they are honouring God better than us. If they acknowledge God as Creator and we say his universe was an accident then maybe they are doing that better than us.

What we find in any faith where fundamentalism takes over from proper scientific rigour is that the progress of knowledge first of all slows, then stops, and then goes backwards. Turkey and Saudi are now going backwards, and they are not the only ones; parts of the US are heading the same way.

But Creationism and indeed evolutionism has nothing to do with scientific rigour. Making the kinds of claims about our origins and development that evolution does is outside the scope of true science. There is no peer reviewed and demonstrable set of experiments that prove evolution.

I agree that generally though there is something seriously wrong in these 2 cultures (more so in Saudia Arabia in which freedom of speech is nearly non existent. Increasingly so in Turkey where Erdogans will to power is stifling all opposition to his rule)

Anti-intellectual fundamentalism is a lazy substitute for actual academic study, proper peer reviewed papers and scientific rigour. It is not something to welcome, on any level.

Emulate that? Honour God by disdaining knowledge? Good grief; what a truly appalling thought.

Again it is not scientific knowledge and the claims of evolution are out of scope of a proper use of the scientific method.

 

[mindlight]

Do you believe this is true and is the reason that little if any progress was made during the Middle Ages where Christianity controlled much of the world?

Medieval Christendom was characterised by a lack of empowerment for the vast majority of its people, by a lack of freedom and by immense poverty. Nonetheless it did represent a marked improvement on the dark ages and barbarian tribes that came before it. I believe that a true appraisal of the Kingdom of God as taught in the gospels will marry the theocratic obedience expected of believers with the freedom of expression and thought of those set free by Gods grace and mercy. Theocracy and Democracy are both necessary components of the fullness of Gods Kingdom. Medieval Christendom in that respect was less Christian in practice than modern Europe even if people said they were Christians then.

Islam today is hardly democratic at all and is moving in a theocratic direction also. What the West can learn from that is the importance of putting God first, what the West can criticise in that is the lack of freedom and of innovation in Islamic cultures.

But they are right if they say God created the universe aren't they rather than asserting it was an accident and then explicable in terms of the development of observable naturalistic principles?

 

[inquiring mind]

In light of all the new Creationist thinking in the academic world, all religious fundamentalists should be embracing scientific inquiry. For example, the earth being millions of years in the making, established and accepted for years in academic circles, is being challenged by some Christian scientists with ideas such as the rapid formation through catastrophic events. They contend there is evidence that violent upheavals and forceful ocean waters may have deposited the earth’s strata layers rather quickly. So, I think the main problem with reconciling the evolving earth, including man, and God’s Word is that our understanding is often incorrect.

 

[Catherineanne]

There are no repeatable experiments that definitively prove evolution. The theory is formulated on the basis of analogous rationalisations based on what can be proven scientifically. So honestly speaking Erdogan is right the theory is controversial and should be seen as such.



Actually Islams so called Golden Age was also more to do with the inherited benefits of Byzantine Christian scholars and the conquest of various empires and cultures with which there had not previously been a free exchange of ideas than it had to do with anything innovative about Islam. As you say Islam lags poorly and no Muslim country is the top 30 list for Nobel prize winners. Of course none of that would matter if they are honouring God better than us. If they acknowledge God as Creator and we say his universe was an accident then maybe they are doing that better than us.



But Creationism and indeed evolutionism has nothing to do with scientific rigour. Making the kinds of claims about our origins and development that evolution does is outside the scope of true science. There is no peer reviewed and demonstrable set of experiments that prove evolution.

I agree that generally though there is something seriously wrong in these 2 cultures (more so in Saudia Arabia in which freedom of speech is nearly non existent. Increasingly so in Turkey where Erdogans will to power is stifling all opposition to his rule)



Again it is not scientific knowledge and the claims of evolution are out of scope of a proper use of the scientific method.

Twaddle, from start to finish. Perhaps worse than that; balderdash.

 

[Catherineanne]

In light of all the new Creationist thinking in the academic world, all religious fundamentalists should be embracing scientific inquiry. For example, the earth being millions of years in the making, established and accepted for years in academic circles, is being challenged by some Christian scientists with ideas such as the rapid formation through catastrophic events. They contend there is evidence that violent upheavals and forceful ocean waters may have deposited the earth’s strata layers rather quickly. So, I think the main problem with reconciling the evolving earth, including man, and God’s Word is that our understanding is often incorrect.

The choice is simple.

Either God tells lies in creation, in which case satan is god because he is a liar and the father of all lies,or else creation tells the truth and so does God.

Am I saying that creationism is an evil teaching from the evil one? Yes I am. There is nothing good about denying science its proper place in our lives, or in pretending that a scientific theory has no validity just because we choose not to believe it.

God does not tell lies.

The stories in the Bible were spoken to people who could not have understood evolution, or the idea of billions of years. They are there to explain why, not how.

 

[mindlight]

Twaddle, from start to finish. Perhaps worse than that; balderdash.

So then, since you sound like an expert on this, please give us one example of a repeatable scientific experiment that proves macro-evolutionary theory is true.

 

[mindlight]

The choice is simple.

Either God tells lies in creation, in which case satan is god because he is a liar and the father of all lies,or else creation tells the truth and so does God.

Am I saying that creationism is an evil teaching from the evil one? Yes I am. There is nothing good about denying science its proper place in our lives, or in pretending that a scientific theory has no validity just because we choose not to believe it.

God does not tell lies.

The stories in the Bible were spoken to people who could not have understood evolution, or the idea of billions of years. They are there to explain why, not how.

Third possibility we cannot read what God said in his creation beyond a certain limited and provable range. That makes us liars if we assert something we cannot prove on the basis of a method that requires proof for all its conclusions.

 

[inquiring mind]

The choice is simple.

Either God tells lies in creation, in which case satan is god because he is a liar and the father of all lies,or else creation tells the truth and so does God.

Am I saying that creationism is an evil teaching from the evil one? Yes I am. There is nothing good about denying science its proper place in our lives, or in pretending that a scientific theory has no validity just because we choose not to believe it.

God does not tell lies.

The stories in the Bible were spoken to people who could not have understood evolution, or the idea of billions of years. They are there to explain why, not how.

I’m certainly not denying science has its proper place in our lives. But, we should always remember that ‘knowledge and understanding’ is like ‘intelligence and character’… one without the other will always be lacking. Theories are theories, the truth is the truth, and Jesus tells us that God’s Word is truth (John 17:17). There is definitely nothing good about denying or even doubting God’s Word because of scientific theories that may change over the years with the frequency of a cheap ham radio. I believe there were some pretty smart people during biblical times; and who among us today even understands evolution or can comprehend billions of years.

 

[mindlight]

Anyway getting back to the thread creationism is in the Christian creeds so it is a mute point for someone to argue that this should not be taught as Christian doctrine (Nicene Creed below).

"We believe in One God, Father Almighty, Creator of Heaven and Earth, of all things seen and unseen..."

It also seems that Muslims agree that God created the universe and want to start from that premise rather than naturalistic ones which are reductionist and controversial in what they can demonstrate. They further assert as have most Christians across the world and throughout history that God created Adam and Eve as special creations. These two assertions do not necessarily have to exclude the idea of non-human or plant evolution nor indeed that of an old universe.

This thread is meant to explore what the Muslim view of evolution is in the light of the fact that two prominent Muslim countries have banned its teaching.

Sura 7:11 - It is We Who created you and gave you shape

Sura 7:54 - Your Guardian-Lord is Allah, Who created the heavens and the earth in six days, and is firmly established on the throne (of authority): He draweth the night as a veil o'er the day, each seeking the other in rapid succession: He created the sun, the moon, and the stars, (all) governed by laws under His command. Is it not His to create and to govern? Blessed be Allah, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds!

 

[Limo]

The only two countries to have banned evolution from classrooms have been Turkey and Saudia Arabia

Passions flare as Turkey excludes evolution from textbooks - BBC News

Like most Christians historically Muslims are Creationists. By this I mean that they believe God created the universe and the first man and woman.

What exactly is the Muslim view on evolution? How does it contrast with Young Earth Creationism or Theistic Evolution? Are these Muslim countries actually honouring God in their education systems better than many socalled Christian countries.

If Adam and Eve are special creations then who did their children marry according to Islam?

From scientific perspective evaluation theory is just a theory and it's not fully accepted and agreed among scintests even.
From Islamic teaching perspective Allah told us that he created Adam from land and then gave him spirit, then created Eve from Adam himself.
So Adam and Eve are not from monkeys or whatever.
Eve was giving twins every time she get pregnant.
Regarding, Adam and Eve children marriage، they married among themselves.
The male in first twins married the female in the second twins and vice versa.
Regards

 

[mindlight]

From scientific perspective evaluation theory is just a theory and it's not fully accepted and agreed among scintests even.
From Islamic teaching perspective Allah told us that he created Adam from land and then gave him spirit, then created Eve from Adam himself.
So Adam and Eve are not from monkeys or whatever.

Wow we are pretty much in agreement up to this point.

1) God created the universe and 2) Adam and Eve are special creations. With Adam created first from clay and Eve from Adam

Eve was giving twins every time she get pregnant.
Regarding, Adam and Eve children marriage، they married among themselves.
The male in first twins married the female in the second twins and vice versa.
Regards

Scripture is silent on how this worked out in practice. But the main theories are:

1) as above their children married each other... gives problem of incest

2) God also created a broader group of humans with whom their children mated. But gives problem
As to whether these other humans Were also made in Gods image or had the history with Him that Adam and Eve had, did they evolve, were they dumb brutes by comparison to Adams children?

 

[Limo]

Wow we are pretty much in agreement up to this point.

1) God created the universe and 2) Adam and Eve are special creations. With Adam created first from clay and Eve from Adam



Scripture is silent on how this worked out in practice. But the main theories are:

1) as above their children married each other... gives problem of incest

2) God also created a broader group of humans with whom their children mated. But gives problem
As to whether these other humans Were also made in Gods image or had the history with Him that Adam and Eve had, did they evolve, were they dumb brutes by comparison to Adams children?

Allah told us that every prophet / Messenger to a certain people has different Sharia / laws. Although incest is haram / forbidden in Mosa and Mohamed laws, it was allowed in Adam's laws.

All humans are from Adam and Eve only as told in Quran.
Regards

 

[mark kennedy]

Twaddle, from start to finish. Perhaps worse than that; balderdash.

That's called an ad hominem fallacy, and that's all it is.

 

[mark kennedy]

The only two countries to have banned evolution from classrooms have been Turkey and Saudia Arabia

Passions flare as Turkey excludes evolution from textbooks - BBC News

Like most Christians historically Muslims are Creationists. By this I mean that they believe God created the universe and the first man and woman.

What exactly is the Muslim view on evolution? How does it contrast with Young Earth Creationism or Theistic Evolution? Are these Muslim countries actually honouring God in their education systems better than many socalled Christian countries.

If Adam and Eve are special creations then who did their children marry according to Islam?

As far as I can tell the account of Adam and Eve is identical to the Old Testament Genesis account.

Âdam (Arabic: آدم‎, translit. ʾĀdam‎) is believed to have been the first human being and Nabi (Arabic: نَـبِي‎‎, Prophet) on Earth, in Islam. Adam's role as the father of the human race is looked upon by Muslims with reverence. Muslims also refer to his wife, Hawa (Arabic: حَـواء‎‎, Eve), as the "mother of mankind". Muslims see Adam as the first Muslim, as the Qur'an states that all the Prophets preached the same faith of Islam (Arabic: إِسـلام‎‎, 'Submission' (to God)) (Adam in Islam, Wikipedia)​

 

[mindlight]

As far as I can tell the account of Adam and Eve is identical to the Old Testament Genesis account.

Âdam (Arabic: آدم‎, translit. ʾĀdam‎) is believed to have been the first human being and Nabi (Arabic: نَـبِي‎‎, Prophet) on Earth, in Islam. Adam's role as the father of the human race is looked upon by Muslims with reverence. Muslims also refer to his wife, Hawa (Arabic: حَـواء‎‎, Eve), as the "mother of mankind". Muslims see Adam as the first Muslim, as the Qur'an states that all the Prophets preached the same faith of Islam (Arabic: إِسـلام‎‎, 'Submission' (to God)) (Adam in Islam, Wikipedia)​

From what Limo said also that seems to be true regarding God as Creator and about Adam and Eve as special creations. However it leaves open questions about the age of the earth and the processes God used with non human or plant life. Also a great many Muslims seem to accept evolution albeit not in a way that is integrated with a proper reflection on the qu'ran

 

[mark kennedy]

From what Limo said also that seems to be true regarded God as Creator and Adam and Eve as special creations but it leaves open questions about the age of the earth and the processes God used with non human or plant life. Also a great many Muslims seem to accept evolution albeit not in a way that is integrated with a proper reflection on the qu'ran

Harun Yahya has a rather interesting brand of Islamic creationism. It's highly skeptical of Darwinian natural history and universal common descent.

(Harun Yahya)
(Darwinism Watch)

His material is even used in Islamic schools. I have found his work to be very interesting, well sourced and well thought through.