1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

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

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by mahmoud mrt, Jul 17, 2021.

  1. mahmoud mrt

    mahmoud mrt Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Messages:
    201
    Ratings:
    +58
    Religion:
    Islam
    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.



    -
     
    #1 mahmoud mrt, Jul 17, 2021
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2021
  2. Left Coast

    Left Coast Circular File Complaint Analyst
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2019
    Messages:
    6,827
    Ratings:
    +10,271
    Religion:
    Dharmic Dabbler
    ***MOVED TO RELIGIOUS DEBATES***
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. danieldemol

    danieldemol Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    5,565
    Ratings:
    +5,118
    Religion:
    Spiritual but not religious
  4. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    11,086
    Ratings:
    +9,003
    Religion:
    Atheist
    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.

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

    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.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. mahmoud mrt

    mahmoud mrt Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Messages:
    201
    Ratings:
    +58
    Religion:
    Islam
    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,



    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?




    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”


    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.
     
    #5 mahmoud mrt, Jul 26, 2021
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2021
  6. danieldemol

    danieldemol Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    5,565
    Ratings:
    +5,118
    Religion:
    Spiritual but not religious
    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
     
  7. Jose Fly

    Jose Fly Fisker of men

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2007
    Messages:
    6,970
    Ratings:
    +6,060
    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.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. mahmoud mrt

    mahmoud mrt Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Messages:
    201
    Ratings:
    +58
    Religion:
    Islam

    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.
     
    #8 mahmoud mrt, Jul 27, 2021
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2021
  9. mahmoud mrt

    mahmoud mrt Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Messages:
    201
    Ratings:
    +58
    Religion:
    Islam
    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
     
    #9 mahmoud mrt, Jul 27, 2021
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2021
  10. danieldemol

    danieldemol Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    5,565
    Ratings:
    +5,118
    Religion:
    Spiritual but not religious
    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."

    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?


    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

    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.

    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.)


    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

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

    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.

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

    mahmoud mrt Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Messages:
    201
    Ratings:
    +58
    Religion:
    Islam
    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:

    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.
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
Loading...