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 Quran’s philosophy, including the evolution vs. intelligent design discussion

Discussion in 'Science and Religion' started by danieldemol, Jul 18, 2021.

  1. danieldemol

    danieldemol Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    5,911
    Ratings:
    +5,589
    Religion:
    Spiritual but not religious
    Saw this thread in the Islam DIR started yesterday and thought it would be more informative to have this discussion in a general area, so I have copy/pasted an extract and provided a link below;

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

    '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 [Note: this thread links to the Islam DIR*]'

    I'll check in to add my own thoughts on this in a little while, but since it refers to "atheist philosophy" it might be of interest to atheists (and others) to comment on it in the meantime.

    *Note in brackets inserted by me, not the original poster of the content.
     
  2. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon shunyadragon
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    17,763
    Ratings:
    +8,790
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    The teachings of the Quran represent an evolved view of science and the world in progressive Revelation. beyond the more ancient Biblical perspective.
     
    #2 shunyadragon, Jul 18, 2021
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2021
    • Like Like x 1
  3. danieldemol

    danieldemol Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    5,911
    Ratings:
    +5,589
    Religion:
    Spiritual but not religious
    Would you say there is any evidence of evolution being "guided", and/or that the concept of *unguided evolution* (what i assume is meant by "simple stupid random reaction") is one only held by atheists alone?
     
    #3 danieldemol, Jul 18, 2021
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2021
  4. sun rise

    sun rise "This is the Hour of God"
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2014
    Messages:
    65,827
    Ratings:
    +32,552
    Religion:
    Love
    My answer is that there is no evidence.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. danieldemol

    danieldemol Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    5,911
    Ratings:
    +5,589
    Religion:
    Spiritual but not religious
    Is it fair to say that "Intelligent design" is pseudoscience?
     
  6. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon shunyadragon
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    17,763
    Ratings:
    +8,790
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    Actually in the objective sense either could possibly true in terms of either the natural evolution of human nature, or guided spiritual evolution by the 'Source' some call God(s). I do not believe in "simple stupid random reaction," because there is a consistent cyclic progressive pattern in all the cultures in the history of humanity from the paleo-neolithic to the present that goes back to the evolution of our ancestors beyond homo sapien. Despite claims of 'randomness' the present evidence indicates that the nature of our physical existence is not random. The cyclic nature of our physical existence follows a consistent pattern of cause that goes back to the history of our universe and the possible multiverse existence.

    Yes, it is possible that our existence can be explained naturally, but the question remains open as to the nature of the 'Source.' One thing that is overwhelmingly clear by the evidence is no individual ancient religion or diverse division can possibly give an adequate explanation for the nature of the universal that we experience today.

    I will add that there is no objective verifiable scientific evidence that could possibly explain a hypothesis in support of Intelligent Design, because any hypothesis in support of Intelligent Design would have provide evidence for a 'Designer,' which would falsify the existence of God.
     
    #6 shunyadragon, Jul 18, 2021
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2021
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Dan From Smithville

    Dan From Smithville Veteran Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    18,240
    Ratings:
    +13,045
    Religion:
    Christian
    Yes.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  8. danieldemol

    danieldemol Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    5,911
    Ratings:
    +5,589
    Religion:
    Spiritual but not religious
    Interesting. What do you mean by "spiritual evolution", are you meaning the evolution of the human spirit (as opposed to the physical form)?

    Or do you mean the evolution of the physical human form as directed by a God spirit?

    If you mean the later what would this look like in the event of a disaster which killed every last human (such as for example the sun eventually turning red giant and humans unable to escape to a newer solar system due to inability to outpace the speed of light)?
     
    #8 danieldemol, Jul 18, 2021
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2021
  9. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    8,701
    Ratings:
    +7,693
    Religion:
    none
    Pseudoscience is an euphemism when describing Intelligent Design. It is just poor old religion. There is nothing scientific, not even pseudoscientific, in it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. danieldemol

    danieldemol Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    5,911
    Ratings:
    +5,589
    Religion:
    Spiritual but not religious
    What are your thoughts on guided vs unguided evolution.

    Specifically is there any evidence of guidance in evolution?
     
  11. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    8,701
    Ratings:
    +7,693
    Religion:
    none
    I think there is a (weak) argument to be made for guidance. What we call "random" is, in effect, an event we have no explanation for. With the right determination one can postulate that random events are "acts of god". It would be a very weak and random god working over ages but it is a gap science can't close at the moment. And, depending on the characteristics of the god it might be unscientific when it isn't falsifiable. (If we could somehow block the influence of the god, we could see if creatures in a blocked space would evolve differently, so it isn't necessarily unfalsifiable.)
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  12. gnostic

    gnostic The Lost One

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    Messages:
    18,182
    Ratings:
    +5,547
    Religion:
    Pi π
    The problems aren’t about science, and it isn’t even about atheism.

    No, the problem is what YOU considered to be “science” and what you considered to be “not science”.

    You got everything you said here, BACKWARDS.

    For ONE, “science” have nothing to do with “atheism” or with “theism”.

    Both (atheism and theism) are related to the question of whether one “believe” or “not believe” in the existence of deity or deities.

    YOU DON’T NEED SCIENCE to “believe” or “not believe” in god or gods.​

    You don’t even need philosophy to “believe” or “not believe” in god or gods.

    When a person say either:

    “I believe in god”​

    ...or...

    “I don’t believe in god”​

    They are both just personal statement, they are not scientific stance, nor philosophical stance.

    For ANOTHER, physical sciences or natural sciences are bodies of theories that have been tested through observations, observations like evidence or experiments.

    You cannot OBSERVE god, and you certainly cannot TEST God, so anything related to God, like angels, jinns, miracles, resurrection, heaven or hell, etc, are all unfalsifiable, therefore untestable.

    If you cannot test or observe any claim that God exists, then such claims are deemed unfalsifiable...MEANING, the claim “unscientific”.

    All unfalsifiable claims or concepts, are considered unscientific.

    And for yet, ANOTHER, you were talking about Evolution and the Big Bang cosmology.

    Neither of them are considered “atheism” or theism”, not even “agnosticism”, or whatever other religious or philosophical “-ism”.

    Did you know that Charles Darwin was a Christian between the time in his voyage around the world (1831-1836) to the time he published On Origin Of Species (1859)?

    And many of his fellow geologists, botanists and biologists were mostly Christians?

    Yes, a few of them were atheists and agnostics, but most of the professionals and academics were Christians. Darwin did become agnostic later, like his friend Thomas Henry Huxley, but that was after 1870.

    So for you to say Evolution is only atheistic philosophy, is dishonest and misguided and misinformed claim.

    And it is the same with the Big Bang model. There were 3 independent physicists who proposed the expanding universe model during the 1920s (note that “Big Bang” theory wasn’t coined till 1949), these pioneers to modern physical cosmology were:
    1. Alexander Friedmann (1922), Russian physicist & mathematician
    2. Howard Percy Robertson (1924-25), American physicist & mathematician
    3. Georges Lemaître (1927), Belgian physicist & astronomer
    Lemaître was frequently called the Father of the Big Bang theory, when he wrote and published the Hypothesis Of The Primeval Atom in 1927, but Friedmann and Robertson also contributed considerably to the theory.

    And guess what, danieldemol? Lemaître wasn’t only a Christian, he was Roman Catholic priest!

    But like Evolution, the Big Bang theory have absolutely nothing to do with atheism or with theism.

    So once again, you are misguided and ill-informed, and not honest enough to do a little research, to study the history of BB theory.
     
    #12 gnostic, Jul 19, 2021
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2021
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. danieldemol

    danieldemol Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    5,911
    Ratings:
    +5,589
    Religion:
    Spiritual but not religious
    @gnostic I've rated you a winner for debating the original creator of the content, however your indignation seems to be misdirected at me even though I was not the creator of the OP, I was just quoting a rather long winded rambling misinformed post of somebody else for the purpose of debating it.

    Thanks for your contribution :)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. gnostic

    gnostic The Lost One

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    Messages:
    18,182
    Ratings:
    +5,547
    Religion:
    Pi π
    Sorry...I didn’t read the whole post before replying.
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  15. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon shunyadragon
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    17,763
    Ratings:
    +8,790
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    Yes, but the fact that it is pseudoscience does not answer the question whether God exists or not. It just means that the scientific method cannot answer the question.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  16. gnostic

    gnostic The Lost One

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    Messages:
    18,182
    Ratings:
    +5,547
    Religion:
    Pi π
    If Intelligent Design required the Designer, then yes.

    Not only the concept of ID needs to be falsifiable, then so must the Designer be falsifiable. But if the Designer isn’t falsifiable and isn’t testable, then Intelligent Design isn’t testable too.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
Loading...