Science & the holy Qur’an’s philosophy, including the evolution vs. intelligent design discussion

[mahmoud mrt]

I would like to post a thread about this very important topic. I hope Muslims and non-Muslims here find it informative and beneficial.


First I want to make clear that I fully respect every person’s choice to follow the ideology he’s comfortable with whether this ideology is atheism, theism or and any religious ideology.

I put this thread in Islam DIR to humbly clarify the Islamic Qur’anic perspective I understood through lots of reading and learning throughout my life.


Now we need to state a very important statement which is:

The holy Qur’an is a book of Signs, philosophy, & Guidance; it’s Not a book of science.


Which means that the Goal of the holy Qur’an is to lead the person who reads it to the Path to heaven, encouraging him to believe in God and be grateful to him, thus being more pious increasing his good deeds and repenting from bad deeds, thus leading him to deserve heaven in the hereafter.

So in order to reach this Goal the holy Qur’an states many Signs encouraging the person to think and consider the greatness of the universe, & thus by simple philosophical statements convinces the person that this universe is not created in vain, and that it was created and is still maintained by God who created it to affirm the truth and test every person so as to deserve the grade and degree he deserves in the hereafter.

So the point of the endless debate whether we were created by random non-guided mindless evolution, also whether the universe was created by mindless reaction of the forces of gravity and atomic energy non-guided, This approach is actually not scientific, it’s an atheist philosophical approach.

And the holy Qur’an simply refutes it by stating very strong Simple Philosophical statements. It leaves to God all options of creation including:

- Guided Evolution & Guided reaction of forces, it simply states that God creates everything through a long process, whether this process includes creature to creature evolution, or a long process of creating a creature separately Not derived from another creature. This Concept of long process creation is clear in the holy Qur’an for all the universe and living creatures.


Simply because if you think about it the atheist approach suggests that stupid mindless reaction can return into a very complicated precise and very tuned universe and creatures, it suggests the human’s very complicated and intelligent body & mind was formed by stupid mindless random chances.

The atheist philosophy simply suggests that stupidity can result into complicated intelligence.

And to affirm this atheist philosophy it suggests 2 mere philosophical ideas, that:

- There are endless infinite numbers of parallel universes, and by mere chance our universe was the lucky one being perfectly tuned and able to host life.


In fact there can be No single scientific proof of this idea, it’s simply a Philosophical idea.


- The long process of the universe creation and living creature creation is Not Guided by any intelligent force; it’s a mere random stupid chance.


Again scientific researchers have not agreed on this fact, in fact there are evidences against the idea that the process is simple stupid random reaction. This includes that the Darwin’s idea that the process is steady and totally random was not accurate and not agreed upon. Also that in the history of creatures there were times when numerous very big numbers of different creatures species’ fossils appearing in times where there could not have been a steady random evolution to create these creatures.


The point is that this atheist idea again is actually a philosophical idea, nothing more. And to say that it’s agreed upon scientific fact is completely inaccurate.


The holy Qur’an refutes this idea by a more simple Philosophical approach that:

- There is only One God who created this universe by long creation processes.


When God speaks of creation in the holy Qur’an He uses the phrase “Kon Fa Yakoon” which is a continues tense word meaning: “Be and it continuously becomes”.


He also described the creation of the universe as 6 long phases, and the creation of Adam as a long phased process.


- God’s way of creation is a long process of Guided & maintained reactions where God Guides the creation process from inside.


There is a name of God which is: “Albaten” which means: “The Inner, the insider, whose reflection is inside His creatures”.


That’s why God describes himself in the holy Qur’an as the Reflected light of the universe “Noor Alsamawat wa Alard”, which simply means that the universe is the reflection of His light, because He is the true Existence.


This relates to a thread I posted before; I recommend reading it also:

The Free Will Question., And How Islamic Philosophy views this issue




Now you have both Philosophical approaches simplified, and it’s your responsibility to reach into your soul and choose the philosophy that convinces you and is best for you.


May God Guide us all to the right path.



Happy “Adha” Eid to you all.



-

 

[Left Coast]

***MOVED TO RELIGIOUS DEBATES***

 

[danieldemol]

I have already discussed this thread in the following debate area for those who are interested;
Science & the Quran’s philosophy, including the evolution vs. intelligent design discussion

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So the point of the endless debate whether we were created by random non-guided mindless evolution, also whether the universe was created by mindless reaction of the forces of gravity and atomic energy non-guided, This approach is actually not scientific, it’s an atheist philosophical approach.

That last sentence is false, off course.
It's basic scientific methodology. You don't include into it any entities for which no scientific evidence exists. Since there is no scientific evidence of gods or creators, they aren't included into it. That's it.
You can call that "atheistic" if you want. But it doesn't make it any less scientific.

And the holy Qur’an simply refutes it by stating very strong Simple Philosophical statements. It leaves to God all options of creation including:

- Guided Evolution & Guided reaction of forces, it simply states that God creates everything through a long process, whether this process includes creature to creature evolution, or a long process of creating a creature separately Not derived from another creature. This Concept of long process creation is clear in the holy Qur’an for all the universe and living creatures.

Nothing is being refuted here. Instead, extra-ordinary things are merely being asserted without valid evidence.


Bare claims, that's all.

Simply because if you think about it the atheist approach suggests that stupid mindless reaction

A "mindless" process, can not be "stupid". Minds can be stupid or intelligent. Mindless processes are neither.

can return into a very complicated precise and very tuned universe and creatures, it suggests the human’s very complicated and intelligent body & mind was formed by stupid mindless random chances.

This is a gross misrepresentation of the actual sciences.
The laws of physics and chemistry are not "totally random".
Neither is evolution.

Does probability come into play? Off course. Especially in hindsight.
Does that make everything "totally random"? No.
Did humans simply materialize in a "totally random" way? No.

You're into quite a few logical fallacies here...

The atheist philosophy simply suggests that stupidity can result into complicated intelligence.

Strawman. Multiple ones, in fact.

- There are endless infinite numbers of parallel universes, and by mere chance our universe was the lucky one being perfectly tuned and able to host life.

I don't make such a claim, nor does my acceptance of science depend on it at all.

In fact there can be No single scientific proof of this idea, it’s simply a Philosophical idea.

I don't agree here. In principle, as far as I understood, there could be supporting evidence for a multi-verse. But I agree we don't have such evidence (yet?). I also agree that it is unlikely that we'll see such evidence in our lifetimes (if it exists).

- The long process of the universe creation and living creature creation is Not Guided by any intelligent force; it’s a mere random stupid chance.

Evolution is guided by the environment. It's called natural selection.

Again scientific researchers have not agreed on this fact, in fact there are evidences against the idea that the process is simple stupid random reaction. This includes that the Darwin’s idea that the process is steady and totally random was not accurate and not agreed upon. Also that in the history of creatures there were times when numerous very big numbers of different creatures species’ fossils appearing in times where there could not have been a steady random evolution to create these creatures.

Strawman after strawman after strawman..

The point is that this atheist idea again is actually a philosophical idea, nothing more. And to say that it’s agreed upon scientific fact is completely inaccurate.

It's not. Evolution theory is among the most, if not The most, established theories in all of science.
Creationists could not have chosen a worse one to try and attack in a game of "we can't be right, if evolution is correct". They set themselves up for humiliation and utter failure, I'm sorry to say.

The holy Qur’an refutes this idea by a more simple Philosophical approach that:

- There is only One God who created this universe by long creation processes.

Another bare claim. Bare claims are just claims. They don't "refute" anything.

Now you have both Philosophical approaches simplified, and it’s your responsibility to reach into your soul and choose the philosophy that convinces you and is best for you.

You completely misrepresented the science.
I'll go with the one that has the mountains of independently verifiable objective evidence instead of mere bare claims.

 

[mahmoud mrt]

Well, with all due respect to each member & moderator, and since they decided to move the thread to religious debates section, I will respectfully reply to posts to more clarify my humble point of view,

That last sentence is false, off course.
It's basic scientific methodology. You don't include into it any entities for which no scientific evidence exists. Since there is no scientific evidence of gods or creators, they aren't included into it. That's it.
You can call that "atheistic" if you want. But it doesn't make it any less scientific. .


Nothing is being refuted here. Instead, extra-ordinary things are merely being asserted without valid evidence.



Bare claims, that's all.

To call a thing a scientific fact you must prove it and reproduce it in the lab, this did Not happen, you only made a mere philosophical understanding of historical fossils.

Fossils can be understood in any philosophical way,

You say it’s a scientific fact, then prove it in a Lab, Make a very intelligent creature like a human being evolve in a lab from a less complicated creature.

Make a universe evolve randomly without any precise laws, Science is actually full of astonishment of how precise these laws of the universe are.

Again I respect your philosophy, but I respectfully reject it completely, “No offence at all".

All what you do is trying to forcibly convince people that a mere philosophical approach to understand the history of creation are nonnegotiable Scientific Facts, ignoring the first Scientific law of facts that: every fact must be able to be reproduced in a Lab, and this never happened and will never of course.


And even as mere example if scientists were able to reproduce evolution in Lab, it still does not negate that fact that this process was performed by them in a very intelligent way, thus it will only add proofs that the creation process must be guided by a higher intelligent force.

So I suggest you and all atheists’ community to respectfully rethink this false statement and put their philosophy in the right term, It’s A philosophical approach trying to understand creation, nothing more.

And we as believers have a different philosophical approach, and in fact we see it more reasonable, simpler and fruitful.

And you claim a false claim that science proved that there is No God, and deny us the claim that there is a God, you only contradict yourself,

You Say there is no God while even the process of you speaking includes hundreds of thousands of complicated body and mind organs processes.

We say that this complication cannot by produced except by a very intelligent Creator who created it through long processes,

You deny us that very simple understating of creation, and you forcibly say that your philosophy is that Only right one. Do you call this equality or even rational way of conveying your point of view?

A "mindless" process, can not be "stupid". Minds can be stupid or intelligent. Mindless processes are neither.

Now you speak philosophically again, you say that “Mindless” is not “stupid”, so what is it?

Intelligent, well how it is not stupid while it’s not guided by Intelligence?

You say it’s not stupid & not intelligent at the same time, so what is it? Make up your mind,

Or you just refuse the concept of an Intelligent Force guiding creation and you try to make philosophical approaches again to affirm your point of view, and deny us the mere right to have a different simpler philosophical point of view.

Suit yourself, “No offence at all”

This is a gross misrepresentation of the actual sciences.

The laws of physics and chemistry are not "totally random".

Neither is evolution.


Does probability come into play? Off course. Especially in hindsight.

Does that make everything "totally random"? No.

Did humans simply materialize in a "totally random" way? No.


You're into quite a few logical fallacies here...



Strawman. Multiple ones, in fact.




I don't make such a claim, nor does my acceptance of science depend on it at all.




I don't agree here. In principle, as far as I understood, there could be supporting evidence for a multi-verse. But I agree we don't have such evidence (yet?). I also agree that it is unlikely that we'll see such evidence in our lifetimes (if it exists).




Evolution is guided by the environment. It's called natural selection.





Strawman after strawman after strawman..




It's not. Evolution theory is among the most, if not The most, established theories in all of science.

Creationists could not have chosen a worse one to try and attack in a game of "we can't be right, if evolution is correct". They set themselves up for humiliation and utter failure, I'm sorry to say.




Another bare claim. Bare claims are just claims. They don't "refute" anything.





You completely misrepresented the science.

I'll go with the one that has the mountains of independently verifiable objective evidence instead of mere bare claims.[/

Well you now say that it’s not random, & it’s mere probability or natural selection based on probability. So what is the probability of you as a human existing with very complicated body and mind without any higher intelligent supervision.

Do the math.

You simply negated the Word God, and put the word “Probability”.

Even the most atheist scientists introduced the idea of endless numbers of parallel universes to even put the word “probability” into perspective.

So the probability of this universe needs an endless numbers of parallel universes.

And the probability of God needs only one probability, that there’s only one God who created this universe.

So speaking by the Probability, Which is more probable: One, or endless numbers?

Again do the math, with all due respect to you.

 

[danieldemol]

To call a thing a scientific fact you must prove it and reproduce it in the lab...

Evolution has been reproduced in the lab;
Bacteria make major evolutionary shift in the lab | New Scientist

then prove it in a Lab, Make a very intelligent creature like a human being evolve in a lab from a less complicated creature.

It took 30 million years for humans to evolve from common ape ancestors, so give us the research funding for 30 million years and we'll give you creatures that are intelligent as humans from apes.

Of course none of that is necessary to prove evolution is true, evolution simply states (according to my understanding) that due to random gene mutation new genetic information can come about which may then be selected for reproduction if it is suitable for its environment, causing new species to occur, which Lenski's experiment referred to above proves.

Make a universe evolve randomly without any precise laws, Science is actually full of astonishment of how precise these laws of the universe are.

You have latched onto the word "evolution" here, however in the context of the universe evolution means something different to what it means in a purely biological context. Since you appear not to understand evolution in its biological context I would suggest sticking to that topic until you understand it, then moving onto the unrelated topic of universe evolution to avoid confusion.

But to answer your point here why do you think an alternate universe would have imprecise laws as opposed to having a different set of precise laws?

All what you do is trying to forcibly convince people

How is debating on an internet forum using force (or are you just slandering your opponent)?

And even as mere example if scientists were able to reproduce evolution in Lab, it still does not negate that fact that this process was performed by them in a very intelligent way, thus it will only add proofs that the creation process must be guided by a higher intelligent force.

Its a bit like saying that because ice can be made by man in a lab the ice at the polar regions required an intelligent force when all it required was insufficient energy from the sun to keep the H2O in a liquid state.

So I suggest you and all atheists’ community to respectfully rethink this false statement and put their philosophy in the right term, It’s A philosophical approach trying to understand creation, nothing more.

This is not an atheist vs theist dichotomy, the overwhelming majority of biologists whether theist or atheist support the theory of evolution. Thus by rejecting evolution all you are doing is displaying scientific illiteracy.
I believe in one God and evolution personally, and there are many just like me.

And you claim a false claim that science proved that there is No God

Who said science proved there is no God?

Intelligent, well how it is not stupid while it’s not guided by Intelligence?

Take for example a boat bobbing up and down as it is guided by waves at its mooring. Would you ascribe the human quality of "stupid" to the waves or boat just because the waves and boat don't have a brain guiding them up and down?

In my opinion

 

[Jose Fly]

To call a thing a scientific fact you must prove it and reproduce it in the lab

No you don't. For example. we don't have to reproduce a glacier carving a U-valley in the lab before we can be confident in concluding that it happened.

 

[mahmoud mrt]

Evolution has been reproduced in the lab;

Bacteria make major evolutionary shift in the lab | New Scientist



It took 30 million years for humans to evolve from common ape ancestors, so give us the research funding for 30 million years and we'll give you creatures that are intelligent as humans from apes.


Of course none of that is necessary to prove evolution is true, evolution simply states (according to my understanding) that due to random gene mutation new genetic information can come about which may then be selected for reproduction if it is suitable for its environment, causing new species to occur, which Lenski's experiment referred to above proves.



You have latched onto the word "evolution" here, however in the context of the universe evolution means something different to what it means in a purely biological context. Since you appear not to understand evolution in its biological context I would suggest sticking to that topic until you understand it, then moving onto the unrelated topic of universe evolution to avoid confusion.


But to answer your point here why do you think an alternate universe would have imprecise laws as opposed to having a different set of precise laws?



How is debating on an internet forum using force (or are you just slandering your opponent)?



Its a bit like saying that because ice can be made by man in a lab the ice at the polar regions required an intelligent force when all it required was insufficient energy from the sun to keep the H2O in a liquid state.



This is not an atheist vs theist dichotomy, the overwhelming majority of biologists whether theist or atheist support the theory of evolution. Thus by rejecting evolution all you are doing is displaying scientific illiteracy.

I believe in one God and evolution personally, and there are many just like me.



Who said science proved there is no God?



Take for example a boat bobbing up and down as it is guided by waves at its mooring. Would you ascribe the human quality of "stupid" to the waves or boat just because the waves and boat don't have a brain guiding them up and down?


In my opinion

If you read what I said well, I did not deny evolution in many creatures, I just clarified that it’s one of the ways of how God Guides Creation, and in order for the creatures to evolve with all the complexity it needs a higher Intelligent Guide.


This kind of experiments does not negate the fact that to make another totally Different species kind it needs guidance from a higher force.

So if you proved that bacteria can evolve from other bacteria, Have you proved that Humans can evolve from bacteria or even from Apes? you could not, because it needs millions of years.

And yes it needs millions of years to prove, that’s the point. Neither I nor you can put this test in a Lab, and probably no one will because humanity will not probably last much in time to even think to perform such experiment.


And let us go back, Who created the bacteria, who created the organic cells, go back further, who created the atom, go back further, who created photons.


And I know some will comment “Who Created God” Well I recommend reviewing this post again to see how simple Philosophical approach can answer this question.

The Free Will Question., And How Islamic Philosophy views this issue


Part of the science should be the humility and humbleness, You cannot perform an evolutionary experiment to transform an Ape to a Human because it needs millions of years, So at least be humble enough to say that it’s a probability, not Just brag Saying “Anyone who rejects this is an illiterate” This is “and forgive me” mere arrogance. “No offence at all”.



And you say I confuse Biological evolution to Universe creation. With all due respect, No I’m not.

It’s now a known fact that the laws of the universe are very complicated and precise, So even atheist Scientists tried to solve this mystery that Clearly points to God as a higher intelligent force, by saying that there are endless parallel Universes.

Again be humble enough to say that this is a philosophical probability, not brag that anyone who rejects it is an illiterate.

And you say that the other parallel universes may have precise laws also; well again you presume a fact based on a philosophical approach, how this gets us any further? The fact is the same, you do not know, and the mere idea of parallel universes was based on a desperate trial to deny God’s Existence by giving an alternative explanation of the very tuned precise laws of the universe.


And yes the atheists always try to say that science Proved that there is no God by a deceiving tone by saying: “Well we proved that scientific facts does not need God and by this there is no God”. It’s the same repeated slogan they repeat, and when they get in trouble like facing how the universe is very perfectly tuned by very precise laws. They turn to philosophy again and say that there’re endless parallel universes.


So they Mock philosophy but use it at the same time, this is “and forgive me again” mere hypocrisy as I humbly see it.



Again I urge you to think logically and be humble enough to accept other views of how the universe and the creatures were created because neither you nor I can put it in the test ever.

And for us to have a clue we need a word from God Almighty.


And as Muslims God Gave us in the holy Quran Clues that He created the universe in a long process including 6 long phases, and that He created Adam Separately by a long process.

As for other creatures He did affirm the long process but did Not Cleary specify whether they were created like Adam separately or by other ways including evolution.

Then the holy Qur’an states that every human should be humble enough and try to understand humbly while letting the full detailed process Knowledge to God Almighty alone.



And ironically you replied to my statements using other philosophical statements, strange that you deny my philosophical statements and try to refute them by also mere philosophical statements.


So with all due respect, accept that this discussion has a very big philosophical part, not calling me an illiterate because I disagree with you “no offence at all”.




God’s existence is in every human heart if the human really reaches to his heart and soul and listens to them.


You say you Believe in one God But also believe in evolution, Well I hope the best for you in the hereafter and hope by being Good and believing in God this gets you to heaven in the hereafter by God’s will.


May God Bless you.

 

[mahmoud mrt]

I would like to affirm the statement that: The holy Qur’an is a book of Signs, philosophy, & Guidance; it’s Not a book of science.

So in the creation of Adam it says that God created him separately using a long process, but it leaves the mechanism to God’s Knowledge

For the Integrity & honesty I would like to Note: that many Muslims believe also that Adam Was created by evolution from other creatures including Apes by referring to the slight hint in those verses in the holy Qur’an:


Chapter 6 verses 130 to 133:

130- ˹Allah will ask,˺ “O assembly of jinn and humans! Did messengers not come from among you, proclaiming My revelations and warning you of the coming of this Day of yours?” They will say, “We confess against ourselves!” For they have been deluded by ˹their˺ worldly life. And they will testify against themselves that they were disbelievers.

131- This ˹sending of the messengers˺ is because your Lord would never destroy a society for their wrongdoing while its people are unaware ˹of the truth˺.

132- They will each be assigned ranks according to their deeds. And your Lord is not unaware of what they do.

133- Your Lord is the Self-Sufficient, Full of Mercy. If He wills, He can do away with you and replace you with whoever He wills, just as He produced you from the offspring of other people:,,, [ “the word is “Qoum Akhareen” which can slightly hint to the possibility of other creatures]



Also this verse chapter 71 verse 14:

14- when He truly created you in stages ˹of development˺


So personally I prefer to believe that Adam was created separately, but I cannot deny the hints in the formal verses that can hint to creation by evolution.

See how we are not so different, Again the Holy Qur’an is a book of Signs, philosophy, & Guidance; it’s Not a book of science.

We need the holy Qur’an to love God more and be kind and just to each other, being pious doing good deeds & repenting from bad deeds, not to fight or argue with each other.


May God Bless you all

 

[danieldemol]

If you read what I said well, I did not deny evolution in many creatures, I just clarified that it’s one of the ways of how God Guides Creation, and in order for the creatures to evolve with all the complexity it needs a higher Intelligent Guide.

The evidence seems to be there that *all* life has evolved. But here is a question for you. Would you say that God guides random processes such as the outcome of a roll of a dice? If you can accept that then surely you can accept that random gene mutation occurs. The only difference between you and an atheist would be that you would say that God guided that random outcome, whereas I imagine an atheist would say "I see no evidence of the outcome being guided by God because the outcome is random, which is what I would expect it to be without supernatural interference."

This kind of experiments does not negate the fact that to make another totally Different species kind it needs guidance from a higher force.


So if you proved that bacteria can evolve from other bacteria, Have you proved that Humans can evolve from bacteria or even from Apes?

Well first of all from a purely physical perspective, humans are apes. We are not a "totally different species" than apes. Secondly, if you can accept that small changes can occur over time, what is there to magically stop small changes accumulating into big changes?

And yes it needs millions of years to prove, that’s the point. Neither I nor you can put this test in a Lab, and probably no one will because humanity will not probably last much in time to even think to perform such experiment.

What makes you think humans don't have millions of years to perform such an experiment (other than purely religious beliefs). The sun will go red giant in another 5 billion (not million) years from now.

Also why do you think we can't just look back at the millions of years of experience we have in the fossil record? According to my understanding Endogenous retroviruses appearing at the same insertion point in humans and apes provide strong evidence that we are genetically related. More on that here;

Endogenous retroviruses and the evidence for evolution

And I know some will comment “Who Created God” Well I recommend reviewing this post again to see how simple Philosophical approach can answer this question.

The Free Will Question., And How Islamic Philosophy views this issue

It appears your OP (in the link "The Free Will Question, And How Islamic Philosophy views this issue") does not refer to the question "Who Created God" at all.

Part of the science should be the humility and humbleness, You cannot perform an evolutionary experiment to transform an Ape to a Human because it needs millions of years, So at least be humble enough to say that it’s a probability, not Just brag Saying “Anyone who rejects this is an illiterate” This is “and forgive me” mere arrogance. “No offence at all”.

I did not say “Anyone who rejects this is an illiterate”. Perhaps a definition or two will convey what I was trying to say here;
Illiterate: unable to read or write.
Scientifically illiterate: Couldn't find a definition online, but the next definition should help here
Scientifically literate:
'According to the United States National Center for Education Statistics, "scientific literacy is the knowledge and understanding of scientific concepts and processes required for personal decision making, participation in civic and cultural affairs, and economic productivity".[2] A scientifically literate person is defined as one who has the capacity to:

• Understand, experiment, and reason as well as interpret scientific facts and their meaning.
• Ask, find, or determine answers to questions derived from curiosity about everyday experiences.
• Describe, explain, and predict natural phenomena.
• Read articles with understanding of science in the popular press and engage in social conversation about the validity of the conclusions.
• Identify scientific issues underlying national and local decisions and express positions that are scientifically and technologically informed.
• Evaluate the quality of scientific information on the basis of its source and the methods used to generate it.
• Pose and evaluate arguments based on evidence and to apply conclusions from such arguments appropriately.[3]'

I concede that I did not use the word "scientifically illiterate" correctly here, as I was just loosely using the word to mean "not having an understanding of science". Since I initially thought you were rejecting all evolution I assumed you were not having understanding of evolution (as this is the case with most people who reject it in my experience.)

And you say I confuse Biological evolution to Universe creation. With all due respect, No I’m not.

So even atheist Scientists tried to solve this mystery that Clearly points to God as a higher intelligent force, by saying that there are endless parallel Universes.

Do you have a citation to a reliable source that says this was the motive of atheist scientists? I looked into it and the article Do parallel universes exist? We might live in a multiverse. | Space states, '...That mysterious process of inflation and the Big Bang have convinced some researchers that multiple universes are possible, or even very likely. According to theoretical physicist Alexander Vilenkin of Tufts University in Massachusetts, inflation didn't end everywhere at the same time. While it ended for everything that we can detect from Earth 13.8 billion years ago, cosmic inflation in fact continues in other places. This is called the theory of eternal inflation. And as inflation ends in a particular place, a new bubble universe forms, Vilenkin wrote for Scientific American in 2011.'

According to his wikipedia article, 'In 1976, Vilenkin immigrated to the United States as a Jewish refugee,[7]' Source: Alexander Vilenkin - Wikipedia
I understand a Jew may not necessarily be anything more than a cultural term, but perhaps Vilenkin is a monotheist who believes in multiverse theory, and perhaps his motive for believing in it is different to what you think it is.

And yes the atheists always try to say that science Proved that there is no God by a deceiving tone by saying: “Well we proved that scientific facts does not need God and by this there is no God”.

You are making a generalisation here. Many atheists have simply not seen any convincing evidence for a supernatural process, this does not mean that it is scientifically proven there is no God.

It’s the same repeated slogan they repeat, and when they get in trouble like facing how the universe is very perfectly tuned by very precise laws. They turn to philosophy again and say that there’re endless parallel universes.

I don't see why fine-tuning presents a problem for atheism personally, but then I'm not an atheist so I can't read their minds.

Again I urge you to think logically and be humble enough to accept other views of how the universe and the creatures were created because neither you nor I can put it in the test ever.

Thinking logically implies being accepting of people who have alternative contradictory views, not accepting the views themselves as my own. Also you don't have a crystal ball to know that in the future we won't have means to test a multiverse theory.

And for us to have a clue we need a word from God Almighty.

Then its a shame that no evidence for God dictating to humans exists.

Then the holy Qur’an states that every human should be humble enough and try to understand humbly while letting the full detailed process Knowledge to God Almighty alone.

You seem to be proposing that scientific enquiry should end here. I would argue that if we should let the "full detailed process Knowledge" to God alone it would be made impossible by God to understand the full detailed process and that doesn't appear to be the case.

You say you Believe in one God But also believe in evolution, Well I hope the best for you in the hereafter and hope by being Good and believing in God this gets you to heaven in the hereafter by God’s will.


May God Bless you.

Merely doing good is enough for God.
God bless you.
In my opinion.

 

[mahmoud mrt]

thanks danieldemol for your reply, I was very busy in the past days so I did not see it until now,
We agree to disagree in some points, I respect that and hope the best for you,

Just a simple reply to your question:

Would you say that God guides random processes such as the outcome of a roll of a dice?

In fact yes, I truly believe that God guides random processes such as the outcome of a roll of a dice, I Believe that every dice roll even in gambling games is Guided by God, and all Muslims believe so.

 

[KWED]

First I want to make clear that I fully respect every person’s choice to follow the ideology he’s comfortable with whether this ideology is atheism, theism or and any religious ideology.

So do you think Allah is wrong to criticise and punish people for following any ideology other than Islam?

Which means that the Goal of the holy Qur’an is to lead the person who reads it to the Path to heaven, encouraging him to believe in God and be grateful to him, thus being more pious increasing his good deeds and repenting from bad deeds, thus leading him to deserve heaven in the hereafter.

And this is one of the main problems with Islamic ideology.
Allah is infallible, omniscient and omnipotent. He created mankind only to worship him. He revealed the Quran as his final attempt to persuade people that Islam is true - And yet, hardly anyone is persuaded by the Quran that Islam is true. The only people who see the Quran as anything remarkable are people who were raised to believe that in the first place.
So, given this evidence, it seems that either the Quran (and therefore Islam itself) is not from god, or god made a very poor job of it, which again would be evidence against god.

So the point of the endless debate whether we were created by random non-guided mindless evolution,

No scientist man that argument.

also whether the universe was created by mindless reaction of the forces of gravity and atomic energy non-guided, This approach is actually not scientific, it’s an atheist philosophical approach.

How is scientific research "not scientific"?

it simply states that God creates everything through a long process,

Not according to the Quran. IN it, Allah stated that he created the universe in "six days". Now, I am aware that some apologists claim that "yawm" actually means "a period of many billions of years", but even without all the other uses of the word in the Quran meaning an actual 24 hour day, it would still make no sense. Why six?
Not only that, the Quran gets the order of things mixed up, with the earth being created before the heavens, etc.

whether this process includes creature to creature evolution, or a long process of creating a creature separately Not derived from another creature. This Concept of long process creation is clear in the holy Qur’an for all the universe and living creatures.

But if you accept the evidence-based, scientific narrative of the formation of the universe, evolution of species, etc - when what is the need for god?

Simply because if you think about it the atheist approach suggests that stupid mindless reaction can return into a very complicated precise and very tuned universe and creatures, it suggests the human’s very complicated and intelligent body & mind was formed by stupid mindless random chances.

Not sure where you get the idea that things like gravity, magnetism, evolution, etc are "stupid". They are unconscious processes. They are neither stupid nor clever.
But anyway, the evolution of simple life forms into more complicated ones is a demonstrable fact. We can (and sometimes do) argue over the specific details, but th over-all principle is beyond question. It happened.

The atheist philosophy simply suggests that stupidity can result into complicated intelligence.

There is no "atheist philosophy". Atheism is a single-issue position on the existence of gods. Nothing more.
Atheists can follow any philosophy or political ideology. They can reject evolution. They can believe that everything is just an illusion and we do not really exist. There are also many religious people (some of them qualified scientists) who accept the scientific narrative for the formation of the universe, life etc.

And to affirm this atheist philosophy it suggests 2 mere philosophical ideas, that:
There are endless infinite numbers of parallel universes, and by mere chance our universe was the lucky one being perfectly tuned and able to host life.

Where did you get this nonsense from? There are plenty of atheists who do not subscribe to the concept of the multiverse.

In fact there can be No single scientific proof of this idea, it’s simply a Philosophical idea.

Not quite. It is a scientific hypothesis. However, no scientists claims that there is evidence for infinite universes, so you are attacking a straw man.

The long process of the universe creation and living creature creation is Not Guided by any intelligent force; it’s a mere random stupid chance.

With all due respect, if you are going to try and criticise scientific concepts like evolution, it's probably a good idea to try and understand them first. Evolution is not "mere random chance". And again, where is this idea of "stupidity" coming from? Quite bizarre.

In fact there are evidences against the idea that the process is simple stupid random reaction. This includes that the Darwin’s idea that the process is steady and totally random was not accurate and not agreed upon. Also that in the history of creatures there were times when numerous very big numbers of different creatures species’ fossils appearing in times where there could not have been a steady random evolution to create these creatures.

Notwithstanding your flawed representation of evolution,
1. No evolutionary biologist claims that Darwin got it all and got it all right. His were the very first baby steps into a brand new field. In the 150 years since, we have discovered a huge amount more, and the technology available to us has increased exponentially. (Basically, this argument is like pointing to a Benz Three Wheeler from 1890 and saying "look, cars are rubbish!" when there is an Audi RS4 behind you)
2. Not sure what you are ferreting to there, but perhaps reading about "punctuated equilibrium" may help.

Now you have both Philosophical approaches simplified, and it’s your responsibility to reach into your soul and choose the philosophy that convinces you and is best for you.

If you genuinely believe that the current body of evidence supporting the Theory of Evolution is a "philosophical argument" of equal weight to "God Did It!", then there really isn't much anyone can say to you - except maybe learn some actual science, FFS!

 

[KWED]

To call a thing a scientific fact you must reproduce it in the lab,

lol! No you don't.
The distance to the moon is a "scientific fact". How do you suggest we "reproduce this in the lab"?[/quote]

Fossils can be understood in any philosophical way,

A person can make any claims about anything, but that doesn't mean they are meaningful in any way. As we have seen already in this thread.

You say it’s a scientific fact, then prove it in a Lab, Make a very intelligent creature like a human being evolve in a lab from a less complicated creature.

Damn! We've been Poe'd!
You are obviously a very sophisticated, comedy troll and I claim my five pounds.
Chapeau!

 

[KWED]

In fact yes, I truly believe that God guides random processes such as the outcome of a roll of a dice, I Believe that every dice roll even in gambling games is Guided by God, and all Muslims believe so.

If you believe that even such a trivial outcome as the roll of a die is determined by Allah's decree, then how can you have free will to alter the outcome of your own destiny?

 

[mahmoud mrt]

So do you think Allah is wrong to criticise and punish people for following any ideology other than Islam?

Allah Does Not criticize or punish out of hate, but actually out of Justness, Truth & in many cases love , and the punishment is only in hereafter as a just consequence to the person's own crimes and wrong doings.

The problem with you is that you fall into the generalization trap thinking that believers and religions are mere naive silly assumptions, And that according to Islam anyone who does not precisely follow it will be punished in hell eternally.

Sorry, but with all due respect, this means that you are actually illiterate regarding religions, and specifically regarding Islam and the holy Qur’an (no offence at all), you think exactly Not so different from extremists from every ideology including many small minded Muslims.

The Trap of stupid generalization is the key of every misconception, And the holy Qur’an is full of warnings of this trap and refutation of this wrong way of thinking,

So If you totally generalize then you’re wrong according to the holy Qur’an, whether you are a Muslim or non-Muslim

I suggest you read this thread if you are willing to view and respect other point of view than you own proud assumptions (no offence at all)

Heaven and Hell: their description, philosophy and the conditions for entering either of them.

And this is one of the main problems with Islamic ideology.

…- And yet, hardly anyone is persuaded by the Quran that Islam is true. The only people who see the Quran as anything remarkable are people who were raised to believe that in the first place.

So, given this evidence, it seems that either the Quran (and therefore Islam itself) is not from god, or god made a very poor job of it, which again would be evidence against god.

I don’t know from where you got these assumptions, again complete ignorance of the social history and even actual nowadays facts.

Islam persuaded and still is persuading thousands of Europeans, Americans, and other nationalities who were Not raised as Muslims.

In fact Islam was spread in Arabia at the time of the prophet mostly when the peace treaty with pagans was signed “The Hudaybiyyah Treaty at year 6 Higri, in 628 AD”. In only 2 years after the peace treaty most Arabian tribes converted to Islam willingly.


Islam was spread by reason and good morals, many Islamic countries in Africa and east Asia had No single Islamic army invading it, but millions followed Islam when they saw how Muslims traders were Just ,honest, friendly, & pious.

It seems that you are affected by the lies that Islam was spread by the sword,

Well, The sword in the middle ages was to protect the right of choosing the religion, Which was forbidden by the Roman byzantine, Persian, and most of the kingdoms near Arabia then, the Islamic armies invaded the Roman byzantine, Persian, and Spain countries As a defense to protect the right to choose the religion, No one was forced to be a Muslim.

Just a hint, it took around 400 years after Muslim armies entered Egypt for the Muslim population to reach 90%. In fact When Muslims Entered Egypt they freed all the Egyptian Christian Priests and Monks who were persecuted by the roman byzantine empire before, and gave Christians all their rights.

So the point of the endless debate whether we were created by random non-guided mindless evolution,

No scientist man that argument.

With all due respect, Some of them made it many times in many public programs, not directly, but as I said indirectly with clear indication that any person can feel and understand that this is their clear point of view.

also whether the universe was created by mindless reaction of the forces of gravity and atomic energy non-guided, This approach is actually not scientific, it’s an atheist philosophical approach.

How is scientific research "not scientific"?

When the research is arrogant and absent of humbleness claiming that it “Got it all” with No debate, and try to make a philosophical claim that its conclusions that there was No Intelligent Guidance to creations process, Not respecting the other point of view. Then Yes it’s Not scientific.

When two persons agree on a seen thing or observation, but they have different approaches of Who made it and why, then they should respect each other’s different philosophical approaches. Again Part of the science should by humbleness and humility, not arrogance.

Science is far behind to claim that it “Got it all” and understood everything, And Also has No right to attack other Philosophical approaches Claiming that it’s Not scientific. I hope you understand the point and learn to respect. (no offence at all)

Not according to the Quran. IN it, Allah stated that he created the universe in "six days". Now, I am aware that some apologists claim that "yawm" actually means "a period of many billions of years", but even without all the other uses of the word in the Quran meaning an actual 24 hour day, it would still make no sense. Why six?
Not only that, the Quran gets the order of things mixed up, with the earth being created before the heavens, etc.

In a number of times the holy Quran mentions the creation process; it’s appended with the patience direction, So it’s clear that God wants us to learn patience and gives us an example by the creation process.

Just an Example” Chapter 50:

“38- Indeed, We created the heavens and the earth and everything in between in six Days,1 and We were not ˹even˺ touched with fatigue.

39- So be patient ˹O Prophet˺ with what they say. And glorify the praises of your Lord before sunrise and before sunset.”

Chapter 71:

“14- when He truly created you in stages ˹of development˺”


And the word “Yawm: Day” in the holy Quran Clearly means different general long periods in many clear cases:

Chapter 32:

“5- He conducts every affair from the heavens to the earth, then it all ascends to Him on a Day whose length is a thousand years by your counting.””

Chapter 70:

“4- ˹through which˺ the angels and the ˹holy˺ spirit1 will ascend to Him on a Day fifty thousand years in length.” “



And the point of mixing up that Earth was created before heaven is mere misconception and ignorance of the Arabic language, the word “Thum: Then” in Arabic does Not indicate "in many cases linguistically" consequence one thing after the other chronologically, but Only elaboration of the details of the phases regardless of the chronological sequence, and this case mentioned:

Chapter 41 verses 9 to 12:

“ Ask ˹them, O Prophet˺, “How can you disbelieve in the One Who created the earth in two Days? And how can you set up equals with Him? That is the Lord of all worlds. He placed on the earth firm mountains, standing high, showered His blessings upon it, and ordained ˹all˺ its means of sustenance—totaling four Days exactly1—for all who ask. Then “Thum” He turned towards the heaven when it was ˹still like˺ smoke, saying to it and to the earth, ‘Submit, willingly or unwillingly.’ They both responded, ‘We submit willingly.’


And In fact the holy Qur'an in all other verses mentions heavens creation before earth creation “Samawat: Meaning Skies or Heavens, Not the Hereafter Heaven of course which is the other Arabic word “Janna: The Garden of Heaven”.

Again The holy Qur’an Must be read as whole integrated book, as the prophet taught us to read it.


Chapter 6:

1- All praise is for Allah Who created the heavens and the earth and made darkness and light.1 Yet the disbelievers set up equals to their Lord ˹in worship˺.

Chapter 7:

54- Indeed your Lord is Allah Who created the heavens and the earth in six Days,1 then established Himself on the Throne. He makes the day and night overlap in rapid succession. He created the sun, the moon, and the stars—all subjected by His command. The creation and the command belong to Him ˹alone˺. Blessed is Allah—Lord of all worlds!”

Chapter 14:

“19- Have you not seen [i.e., considered] that Allah created the heavens and the earth in truth? If He wills, He can do away with you and produce a new creation.

Chapter 2:

“164- Indeed, in the creation of the heavens and the earth; the alternation of the day and the night; the ships that sail the sea for the benefit of humanity; the rain sent down by Allah from the skies, reviving the earth after its death; the scattering of all kinds of creatures throughout; the shifting of the winds; and the clouds drifting between the heavens and the earth—˹in all of this˺ are surely signs for people of understanding.”

Chapter 3:

“190 -Indeed, in the creation of the heavens and the earth and the alternation of the day and night there are signs for people of reason.

191- ˹They are˺ those who remember Allah while standing, sitting, and lying on their sides, and reflect on the creation of the heavens and the earth ˹and pray˺, “Our Lord! You have not created ˹all of˺ this without purpose. Glory be to You! Protect us from the torment of the Fire.”

But if you accept the evidence-based, scientific narrative of the formation of the universe, evolution of species, etc - when what is the need for god?

Well With all due respect, this is a pity, you claim that there is No need for God, while our very meaning of existence, Morals, & the very goal of our lives depend on the belief in God

I really hope that you comprehend this one day, again with all due respect it’s pity this feeling of “No need for God” from your side, what is the goal of your life if not intended for a bigger purpose other than being just dust and disappearing from existence with no meaning, believing that the universe actually has No higher Goal.

May God Guide you, and again I hope the best for you

Not sure where you get the idea that things like gravity, magnetism, evolution, etc are "stupid". They are unconscious processes. They are neither stupid nor clever.

I disagree on this, The mere Logical thinking from my side and every believer’s side is that the process Must be conscious and Guided by a higher power.

But anyway, the evolution of simple life forms into more complicated ones is a demonstrable fact. We can (and sometimes do) argue over the specific details, but th over-all principle is beyond question. It happened.

And I Clearly agreed if you read my posts well that it happened to many creatures, the only difference is that I Truly Logically Conclude and believe that it was and still is Guided by God.

And you mentioned the difference in the process details, yes, and I see it as more you dig through details the more you logically conclude that it Must be Guided by a higher power,

I hope with all due respect to you that one day you can respect our point of view and be humble enough to do so.

May God Bless you

 

[mahmoud mrt]

If you believe that even such a trivial outcome as the roll of a die is determined by Allah's decree, then how can you have free will to alter the outcome of your own destiny?

In answer to your question, I recommend that you review The Philosophical Islamic point of view clarifying and answering this argument:

The Free Will Question., And How Islamic Philosophy views this issue


Note: I think I made my point of view clear for every other paragraph you wrote, so no need for repeating, Although I notice a sense of bragging and arrogance in your criticism “no offence at all”, well, again I respect your point of view and hope the best for you.


May God Bless you.

 

[KWED]

Allah Does Not criticize or punish out of hate, but actually out of Justness, Truth & in many cases love , and the punishment is only in hereafter as a just consequence to the persons own crimes and wrong doings.

That doesn't answer my question.
You said..."I fully respect every person’s choice to follow the ideology he’s comfortable with whether this ideology is atheism, theism or and any religious ideology."
Allah punishes people for following ideologies other than Islam (and his descriptions of that punishment are quite abhorrent).
So either you disagree with Allah punishing people for following those ideologies, or you were being dishonest.

Also, horribly torturing someone for eternity simply because they weren't convinced that Islam is true is hardly "just". It is clearly unjust. Your claims of punishing someone because of "love" sounds like the sort of thing a domsetic abuser would say.

The problem with you is that you fall into the generalization trap thinking that believers and religions are mere naive silly assumptions,

Religions are silly, and believers are often naive, but it is completely understandable why people who have been indoctrinated from childhood follow those religions.

And that according to Islam anyone who does not precisely follow it will be punished in hell eternally.

That is not what Allah and Muhammad said. The narrative often varies slightly but it is basically anyone who has been made aware of Islam but rejects it will indeed be horribly tortured for eternity. It is repeated many times in the Quran and sunnah.

Sorry, but with all due respect, this means that you are actually illiterate regarding religions, and specifically regarding Islam and the holy Qur’an (no offence at all), you think exactly Not so different from extremists from every ideology including many small minded Muslims.

Hmm, you seem upset. And you also seem to be making wild and nonsensical assertions with no argument to support them.

So If you totally generalize then you’re wrong according to the holy Qur’an, whether you are a Muslim or non-Muslim

1. Where did I generalise about Islam or the Quran?
2. Where does the Quran say it is wrong to generalise?

I suggest you read this thread if you are willing to view and respect other point of view than you own proud assumptions (no offence at all)
Heaven and Hell: their description, philosophy and the conditions for entering either of them.

With all due respect, I get my knowledge of the Islamic concepts of heaven and hell from the Quran, sunnah and classical tafsir, not some random apologist on the internet who seems unhappy with some of the stuff that Allah and Muhammad said. (Don't worry, I have noticed this with many modernist Muslims, and I completely understand it. Some of that stuff is really awful!)

Islam persuaded and still is persuading thousands of Europeans, Americans, and other nationalities who were Not raised as Muslims.

Yes, there are converts (a few thousand a year in the UK), but their numbers are statistically irrelevant in comparison to those "born into" islam. Also, studies suggest that the numbers of converts are caskanced by the numbers who leave islam.
A study in the US (by a Muslim academic) suggested that 75% or converts left within three years.

In fact Islam was spread in Arabia at the time of the prophet mostly when the peace treaty with pagans was signed “The Hudaybiyyah Treaty at year 6 Higri, in 627 AD”. In only 2 years after the peace treaty most Arabian tribes converted to Islam willingly.

You seem confused about your Islamic history (not surprising as many young Muslims are taught a highly partisan narrative that is not supported by academic historians). The treaty was only in effect for less than 2 years and most of the Muslim expansionist campaigns took place after the treaty had been abandoned and Mecca invaded. Most of the tribes that converted did so because it was politically expedient. After the conquest of Mecca, Muhammad was the most powerful military and political leader in the region so it is unremarkable that people chose to join him rather than fight him. Your argument is a bit like saying that in 1940, French people willingly became Nazis. It is incredibly naive.

Islam was spread by reason and good morals, many Islamic countries in Africa and east Asia had No single Islamic army invading it, but millions followed Islam when they saw how Muslims traders were Just ,honest, friendly, & pious.

Are you high? The spread of Islam through North Africa, Spain, Eastern Europe and South Asia was dominated by military campaigns. The period is even referred to as "The Early Islamic Conquests" by historians!
Here is a brief overview. If you want more detailed information, follow the reference links in the text to the source material.

It seems that you are affected by the lies that Islam was spread by the sword,

It was, to a large extent. That is undeniable fact supported by mountains of historical evidence. I know some apologists are not fond of evidence. maybe you are different?

No one was forced to be a Muslim.

So why did Muhammad say "I have been commanded to fight the disbelievers until they submit to Islam. When they do, their lives and property will be protected from me"? (several sahih hadith)

Just a hint, it took around 400 years after Muslim armies entered Egypt for the Muslim population to reach 90%. In fact When Muslims Entered Egypt they freed all the Egyptian Christian Priests and Monks who were persecuted by the roman byzantine empire before, and gave Christians all their rights.

Seriously, WTF are you on about? The Byzantine Empire was Christian!

 

[KWED]

With all due respect, Some of them made it many times in many public programs, not directly, but as I said indirectly with clear indication that any person can feel and understand that this is their clear point of view.

No idea what you are on about now.
You claimed that scientists claim man was created through random evolution. No scientist has made that claim because evolution is not random.

When the research is arrogant and absent of humbleness

I literally have no idea what you are talking about now. How can research be "arrogant"? And WTF does "absent of humbleness" mean?

claiming that it “Got it all” with No debate,

Science never does this. There is always debate in science. It's the basis or "peer review".
Ironically it is religion that claims to have "got it all, with no debate". Have you ever challenged Allah on any of his claims? No, thought h=not. You just accept them as fact without question, don't you.

and try to make a philosophical claim that its conclusions that there was No Intelligent Guidance to creations process, Not respecting the other point of view.

All the evidence suggests that there is no designer. If a "point of view" rejects the evidence and makes unsupported claims, then it does not deserve respect.

Then Yes it’s Not scientific.

It is quite clear that you have no idea about what is and is not science.

“38- Indeed, We created the heavens and the earth and everything in between in six Days,1 and We were not ˹even˺ touched with fatigue.

But this is demonstrably wrong.

39- So be patient ˹O Prophet˺ with what they say. And glorify the praises of your Lord before sunrise and before sunset.”

This is telling Muhammad to be patient with those who reject Allah's signs. It has nothing to do with creation taking a long time.

“14- when He truly created you in stages ˹of development˺”

This is referring to the stages of human development mentioned in 23:14

And the word “Yawm: Day” in the holy Quran Clearly means different general long periods in many clear cases:
Chapter 32:“5- He conducts every affair from the heavens to the earth, then it all ascends to Him on a Day whose length is a thousand years by your counting.””
“4- ˹through which˺ the angels and the ˹holy˺ spirit1 will ascend to Him on a Day fifty thousand years in length.” “

OK, so a day for Allah is fifty thousand earth years. That is still to short by billions of years. If Allah was trying to explain that the universe took a very, very, very long time to create, why did he say "six days"? As you pointed out, when something took just a long time, he went to the trouble of explaining how long it actually was, in the context of thousands of years. But for the creation of the universe he was quite specific - six days.
The point of him saying six days was to show how powerful he is because he can do all that in just six days. It's just a shame that it's wrong. The people writing the Quran 1400 years ago weren't to know that though.

And the point of mixing up that Earth was created before heaven is mere misconception and ignorance of the Arabic language, the word “Thum: Then” in Arabic does Not indicate consequence one thing after the other chronologically in many cases, but Only elaboration of the details of the phases, and this is in only one paragraph in the holy Qur’an.

I love how some random on the internet claims that dozens of bilingually fluent, Muslim scholars all translated the Quran wrong, but they can do it properly!

Also, if you look at the other uses in the Quran, it is describing a linear consequence. "First this, then that".

Again The holy Qur’an Must be read as whole integrated book, as the prophet taught us to read it.

So Muslims are not allowed to quote individual verses or passages in order to illustrate a point?
Yikes, looks like pretty much every imam and scholar has been doing it wrong then.

1- All praise is for Allah Who created the heavens and the earth and made darkness and light.1 Yet the disbelievers set up equals to their Lord ˹in worship˺.

Again, this is wrong. You can't "make darkness" it is just an absence of light. There are several references to Allah creating night and day. They are not actual things. There are just human concepts.

Indeed, in the alternation of the day and the night; the ships that sail the sea for the benefit of humanity; the rain sent down by Allah from the skies, reviving the earth after its death; the scattering of all kinds of creatures throughout; the shifting of the winds; and the clouds drifting between the heavens and the earth—˹in all of this˺ are surely signs for people of understanding.”

All of these have completely natural explanations that do not require god. We know that no god is required for any of them.

All you have done here is highlight passages in the Quran that display a lack of knowledge of how the world works.

Well With all due respect, this is a pity, you claim that there is No need for God, while our very meaning of existence, Morals, & the very goal of our lives depend on the belief in God

We don't have a "meaning of existence" any more than gorillas or eagles or sharks or ants do.
Morals existed long before islam was invented. What's more, Allah's morals are awful! He approves of slavery, execution by torture, using captive women for sex, domestic violence, etc. All of these are universally condemned and illegal in civilised society.

I really hope that you comprehend this one day, again with all due respect it’s pity this feeling of “No need for God” from your side, what is the goal of your life if not intended for a bigger purpose other than being just dust and disappearing from existence with no meaning, believing that the universe actually has No higher Goal.

We are lucky/unlucky to have evolved brains complex enough to allow abstract thoughts. We only think we are special because we are able to think we are special. However, understanding that our existence is ultimately meaningless doesn't mean that we can't enjoy our lives and try to help others enjoy theirs, while minimising harm. That is the "purpose" of my life.

May God Guide you, and again I hope the best for you

According to the Quran, Allah has probably misguided me. It certainly seems like he has "set a seal on my heart so I cannot believe" even if I am warned. Perhaps I am one of those who he "has surely created for hell"?

Given that Allah created mankind "only so that we could worship him", it seems strange that he deliberately prevents some people from worshiping him. Oh well, Allah knows best.

I disagree on this, The mere Logical thinking from my side and every believer’s side is that the process Must be conscious and Guided by a higher power.

Gravity and magnetism are conscious? Interesting.

And I Clearly agreed if you read my posts well that it happened to many creatures, the only difference is that I Truly Logically Conclude and believe that it was and still is Guided by God.

Cool. So you accept that you evolved from am ape-like ancestor over millions of years, and you are related to primates like chimpanzees and gorillas.

And you mentioned the difference in the process details, yes, and I see it as more you dig through details the more you logically conclude that it Must be Guided by a higher power,

So why have none of the tens of thousands of qualified scientists who have spent decades "digging through the details" concluded that it must be controlled by god? Why is it only scientifically illiterate religionists who make this claim?

I hope with all due respect to you that one day you can respect our point of view and be humble enough to do so.

Careful with that irony. It burns.

 

[KWED]

In answer to your question, I recommend that you review The Philosophical Islamic point of view clarifying and answering this argument:

The Free Will Question., And How Islamic Philosophy views this issue

.

Can't see anything in there that answers my question.
Can you keep it brief and stick to the point?

If, as Umar Ibn al-Khattab said, "The outcome of all events is determined by Allahs decree. If something is meant for you you cannot avoid it, but if it is not yours by destiny you can never gain it" - how can we change the course of our lives? How can dua alter Allah's perfect plan for you or anyone else?
If Allah has decreed that I will never see the truth of Islam, then how can I see the truth of Islam?
And if Allah has decreed that I will never see the truth of Islam, how can he punish me for that?

Please answer these specific point.

 

[mahmoud mrt]

That doesn't answer my question.
You said..."I fully respect every person’s choice to follow the ideology he’s comfortable with whether this ideology is atheism, theism or and any religious ideology."
Allah punishes people for following ideologies other than Islam (and his descriptions of that punishment are quite abhorrent).
So either you disagree with Allah punishing people for following those ideologies, or you were being dishonest.

Also, horribly torturing someone for eternity simply because they weren't convinced that Islam is true is hardly "just". It is clearly unjust. Your claims of punishing someone because of "love" sounds like the sort of thing a domsetic abuser would say.

God taught us in the holy Qur’an to respect the person’s choice; this is irrelevant that his choice could lead him to punishment.

And if you read the links I mentioned you’ll immediately notice that in many cases God punishes in this Earthly life and in the Hereafter simply out of love: to purify and guide the person to the way to heaven, because simply the punishment for most persons in Not Eternal, kindly read the link carefully to see how the holy Qur’an analysis this.

Heaven and Hell: their description, philosophy and the conditions for entering either of them.

Religions are silly, and believers are often naive, but it is completely understandable why people who have been indoctrinated from childhood follow those religions.

Kindly look in your words in the mirror to know who’s words are silly, “no offence at all”

That is not what Allah and Muhammad said. The narrative often varies slightly but it is basically anyone who has been made aware of Islam but rejects it will indeed be horribly tortured for eternity. It is repeated many times in the Quran and sunnah.

Again kindly read the posts before jumping to reply. You’re not willing to even read my links and make replies indicating that’ you’re incapable of even trying to understand the other point of view.

And Regarding the difference between the holy Qur’an and Sunna “hadiths: Traditions”, I recommend reviewing this post:

Islamic view of Homosexuality and the different types of sexual attraction spectrum & intercourses.

1. Where did I generalise about Islam or the Quran?

Your very Words meaning that any non-Muslim will be punished in hell eternally is simply indicated that you "and forgive me" is unacquainted and ignorantly generalize. Kindly read the posts “no offence at all”.

2. Where does the Quran say it is wrong to generalise?

Again kindly just read the links, I quote the links to exact related posts with clear verses related to this question in the thread again for you:

Heaven and Hell: their description, philosophy and the conditions for entering either of them.

Heaven and Hell: their description, philosophy and the conditions for entering either of them.

Heaven and Hell: their description, philosophy and the conditions for entering either of them.

You seem confused about your Islamic history (not surprising as many young Muslims are taught a highly partisan narrative that is not supported by academic historians). The treaty was only in effect for less than 2 years and most of the Muslim expansionist campaigns took place after the treaty had been abandoned and Mecca invaded. Most of the tribes that converted did so because it was politically expedient. After the conquest of Mecca, Muhammad was the most powerful military and political leader in the region so it is unremarkable that people chose to join him rather than fight him. Your argument is a bit like saying that in 1940, French people willingly became Nazis. It is incredibly naive.

Completely inaccurate and misleading, you pic what you want without even the courtesy to read the full story from any respected history book. Or even a full wiki page.

1- Before the peace treaty Muslim Men “Not mentioning women, children and old" were around Only 1500 Men.

2- The treaty made peace, and thus in the next 2 years peaceful preaching increased the number of Muslim men to 10,000 men with many Arabian tribes willingly joining Islam fully convinced.

3- In the year 8 Higri after 2 years of the treaty Mecca Tribe violated the treaty and killed around 20 Muslims pilgrims in the holy city of Mecca. Thus the Muslim army peacefully annexed Mecca with No revenge or slaughter or even persecution, Mecca’s army was around Only 2000 Men, while the Muslim army was around 10,000 men, there was a small very few men skirmish, And the prophet Cleary indicated that he does Not wish for any spilled blood in Mecca Forgiving and granting freedom to all citizens of Mecca to stay pagan or join Islam willingly.


And so overwhelmed by the Prophet’s kindness, Most of Mecca citizens chose willingly to join Islam.


Thus the number of Muslims men reached around 12,000 men.


4- Thus directly after this a collation of some of still pagan tribes lead by the “Altaef” City tried to attack the Muslim army to annex Mecca and thus rule the whole of Arabia, “Battle of Hunayn “, but they were defeated by the Muslim army, and again the prophet afterwards granted many of them freedom and overwhelmed them with gifts and kindness,


And So again eventually overwhelmed by the Muslims kindness they also joined Islam willingly.


And by this at the year 9 Higri Most of the Arabian pagan tribes willingly joined Islam.


And in the next pilgrimage the Muslims who performed the rituals with the prophet were around 100,000 men and women. Loving, following, & adoring the Prophet willingly, With tears of joy, belief and love.


Treaty of Hudaybiyyah - Wikipedia


Conquest of Mecca - Wikipedia


Farewell Sermon - Wikipedia

Are you high? The spread of Islam through North Africa, Spain, Eastern Europe and South Asia was dominated by military campaigns. The period is even referred to as "The Early Islamic Conquests" by historians!
Here is a brief overview. If you want more detailed information, follow the reference links in the text to the source material.

You again pic and mislead, I Cleary stated there was a conquest, but clarified its reason is to protect the freedom to join Islam, and the That No one was forced to convert to Islam.

I really hope you even read the posts you reply to ”no offence at all”

So why did Muhammad say "I have been commanded to fight the disbelievers until they submit to Islam. When they do, their lives and property will be protected from me"? (several sahih hadith)

Again misleading, Prophet Muhammed never forced anyone to join Islam, this so called hadith contradict with many verses in the holy Qur’an, and Also contradict the conclusion of the combined historical sources and history.


Again kindly differentiate between Hadiths “Traditions” and the holy Qur’an, there is a huge difference between their preservation techniques, kindly refer again to the posts clarifying this.

Islamic view of Homosexuality and the different types of sexual attraction spectrum & intercourses.


Even fundamentalist Muslim scholars stating that this Hadith is true Cleary state that it means only that the Arabian pagans will submit to allowing the freedom of joining Islam willingly.

Because simply all the historical sources Clearly state that No one was forced to convert to Islam during the prophet's life.


Holy Qur’an:


Chapter 10:

99- Had your Lord so willed ˹O Prophet˺, all ˹people˺ on earth would have certainly believed, every single one of them! Would you then force people to become believers?


Chapter 2:

256- Let there be no compulsion in religion, for the truth stands out clearly from falsehood.1 So whoever renounces false gods and believes in Allah has certainly grasped the firmest, unfailing hand-hold. And Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing.


Chapter 18:

29- And say, ˹O Prophet,˺ “˹This is˺ the truth from your Lord. Whoever wills let them believe, and whoever wills let them disbelieve.” Surely We have prepared for the wrongdoers a Fire whose walls will ˹completely˺ surround them. When they cry for aid, they will be aided with water like molten metal, which will burn ˹their˺ faces. What a horrible drink! And what a terrible place to rest!

Seriously, WTF are you on about? The Byzantine Empire was Christian!

The Byzantine Empire was following a different Christian sector than the Egyptians.
'
Egyptian Church had already differentiated from the Roman and then also the byzantine empire Christian sector long before the Islamic annexation of Egypt.
Coptic history - Wikipedia

From Chalcedon to the Arab invasion of Egypt
Copts suffered under the rule of the Byzantine Eastern Roman Empire. The Melkite Patriarchs, appointed by the emperors as both spiritual leaders and civil governors, massacred the Egyptian population whom they considered heretics. Many Egyptians were tortured and martyred to accept the terms of Chalcedon, but Egyptians remained loyal to the faith of their fathers and to the Cyrillian view of Christology. One of the most renowned Egyptian saints of that period is Saint Samuel the Confessor.

Kindly do some effort before replying.