Islam on evolution

Yes, I do get the feeling that the only religion that matters in this forum is Christianity, so much that it deserves its own Bible forum. However, the world is not just Christianity vs others; there are other religions which also had their exposure to evolution, and as it seems, only literally-interpreting Christians (and ICR-wannabe Harun Yahya) found a problem with reality. Others? I think Judaism has no problem with evolution; so does Islam. Recently some Pakistani Muslim scholars published a journal concerning Islam and evolution.Hazara Society for Science-Religion Dialogue
Science-Religion Dialogue 1
http://www.hssrd.org/journal.htmI do not claim that HSSRD's views is the mainstream Muslim view; but then again, (I hate to admit this) most Muslims are not knowledgeable in evolution. And Harun Yahya's creationism is not mainstream either. However, given that Islam values and encourages science, I have no doubt that, given time and promotion, HSSRD's views would enjoy wide acceptance among Muslims.

bumpanybody interested? no?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Andya Primanda:
bump

​

anybody interested? no?

---

Interested yes, but the topic is pretty broad.------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by Andya Primanda:
Yes, I do get the feeling that the only religion that matters in this forum is Christianity, so much that it deserves its own Bible forum. However, the world is not just Christianity vs others; there are other religions which also had their exposure to evolution, and as it seems, only literally-interpreting Christians (and ICR-wannabe Harun Yahya) found a problem with reality. Others? I think Judaism has no problem with evolution; so does Islam. Recently some Pakistani Muslim scholars published a journal concerning Islam and evolution.

---

--I’m speculating that the percentage of Evo’s in all religions (including Christianity) are similar, but correlated in great measure with IQ. As a rule, naturalistic IQ and evolutionism generally seem to walk hand in hand, don’t you think?--But devout and zealous faiths perhaps may generally lean in the direction of YEC or OEC. What is your observation/opinion? A man’s faith is of course difficult to measure naturalistically. You don’t have to answer this question.--Perhaps those that are most elevated in redemptive events of love of God and neighbor(s) disregard the controversy itself as arbitrary, meaningless, and/or ensnaring.

It seems to me that Morris' concept of miracles would need to be in a creation science content before the even reading the non-enemy nature of this board VS. that hints at the legal which needs a bit of appearence even if as if not to be academically begin this slant that is lent to those speaking for anybody this time but I still think that it will be environments and not developements that bring this about.

As to ISLAM evos I just concluded a discussion on fundamentalism in Turkey and I can not see how it does interpret as Syria claim the south of the map against law of any GOD so I do not see how it can be singled out even spirtually that Islam *does* what evos do not. It may be simply that I do not know much from this geography but how can Islam claim that traveling off the map of the Humphrey's edge by even putting everything in a Islam center? Just like I do not see the binary difference of of Creation and Evolution I do not see the trinary spirt of Christianity/Islam/Judism nor am I partisin to any order of these "faiths".

quote:

---

and when He wills a thing [amr] to be, He but says unto it,

​

“Be” - and it is. (Al-Baqarah, 2:117).

​

. .when He wills a thing [amr] to be, He but says unto it,

​

“Be” - and it is. (Aal- Imran, 3:47).

---

quote:

---

And they ask you about the proof. Tell them that the proof is from the amr of my. Lord ... (Al-Isra, 17:85)

---

Yes, but there is also the mandated law of education in the OT, applicable to both sexes. So science, and the asking of HOW things occured, and determining its proof, is a legitimate, mandated quest of humanity. If we are not wrong in seeking how a pineapple grows, or how to cure an illness, we are not wrong in seeking how creation occured. And the answer here cannot be just that 'Tell them that the proof is from the army of my Lord'.In fact, certain answers were not given in order for man to pursue their reasoning, which in turns manifests the greatness of creation. Thus, science is a sacred faculty, sanctioned and mandated by God's laws. We see this in how many people today, even when they are not inclined to theology, rest on science as a sacred belief - they are in fact pursueing truth, which is a pursuit of Godliness in the final analysis: HOW did it all happen.However, one cannot say:

quote:

---

“Allah is the light of the heavens and the earth ...“And in an authentic hadith narrated by Ayesha it has been stated that as Allah is noor

---

We cannot ascribe anything to what the Creator is; we can only say what the Creator is not - which is the 2nd Commandment from Sinai, namely, the Creator is unlike anything created within the universe - not on the land, in the air, or in the oceans, nor in the heavens and galaxies. Light is not the Creator, but what was created by the creator. Light [noor] can be seen by the eye; the Creator cannot be seen by the eye.However, I think Islam means this also, and does not subscribe to light being the creator. Nor can we say an angel [Gabriel] assisted in Creation: the creation predates the creation of angels [opening verse in genesis], and each act of creation is vested in the singular verb. There were no angels or anything else beside the creator at one instant, the meaning of infinite, as per the first 4 words in Genesis: 'IN THE BEGINNING GOD'; then God created the HEAVENS [w/angels]; then the earth.Islam is a fatalistic doctrine, while Judaism is a determinable one; the former says whatever is was meant to be as the will and not changeable; the OT says all things are changeable [correctable] even in the final instances of life. Thus one cannot cease seeking and learning, nor can one say if one is murdered - it was the will of God and thereby become free of that charge; one can be free even in the final nano-secs of life.

quote:

---

In light of the evidence that has been presented above, the following point is absolutely clear and beyond doubt: there is an intimate and intrinsic relationship between the kalimah (or word) “Be!”

---

This too is from genesis. The word 'BE' and that creation occured via the 'WORD', is seen in the first act of creation, namely, 'THE LORD *SAID* LET THERE BE LIGHT'; the term SAID refers to the word/language/will/command, and is condisive to 'BE'. It means no tools or products were used in creation, and none existed. Creation, in its true technical sense, was and is, EX NIHILO.

quote:

---

...“And in an authentic hadith narrated by Ayesha it has been stated that as Allah is noor, He cannot be seen.

---

= "NO MAN SHALL *SEE* ME [know me fully] AND LIVE" [OT]Here, we also begin to see that the OT and Quran are both moving in another direction from the NT.

quote:

---

In summary, the first stage in the long journey from genesis and “the event of creation” to the observable “process of creation” and “shaping” was the Divine Word “Be!” taking the form of a singularly subtle and simple “light”. This “light” did not emit any heat and was also free from any commotion or movement.

---

This is correct, the light mentioned in genesis predates the stars [our sun], and is an essence of light free of heat and movement: there was yet no heat or movement, light being the primodial first trigger entity, meaning nothing else existed. The sun could not produce light if it was no pre-existent of the sun. Its like a tap cannot pour water before water existed. Many science premises hold that light is nothing but heat - but this is an error. The role of the sun is it gave 'LUNIMOSITY' which made light vision friendly [with the embedding of photons]. Prior to the creation of life, there was no need for luminosity, or that it be vision friendly - to or for whom?That luminosity only occured in the 4th cosmic day of creation [not a 24-hour day, because there was yet no 24-hr day w/o luminosity], is seen from this OT verse:

quote:

---

Gen1/ 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 18 and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.

---

This is from Genesis, namely ex nihilo ['AND IT WAS SO']Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

quote:

---

how can Islam claim that traveling off the map of the Humphrey's edge by even putting everything in a Islam center?

---

There is an inherent trait in religions to make them subscribe to their own beliefs. Thus we see a religion rejecting anything which does not subscribe to its own end conclusion, accepting only those which do subscribe. This is an ego syndrome, and is clearly seen between the OT and the NT & Quran; and between the NT and the Quran again.The quran says the OT is distorted, while it is not clearly stated what or which part is distorted; and only the variance of names posited as distorted cannot apply here. The notion of NO GOD W/O MOHAMMED; or that Ishmael must replace Isaac; are not sufficient claims to affirm a notion of distortion - these only cater to an ego syndrome. The issue of laws and history, if distored, are legitimate claims - but these are not posited as the reasonings.The situation facing humanity, vis avis religions, is diabolical and precarious, pointing only to chaos and irresolvable confrontation, destruction and mass murders if push comes to shove - which was the case throughout history. All three Middle-eastern derived religions cannot be right - at least two must be wrong [aside from all being wrong]. The criteria's applicable factors are:If the Quran is right - both the NT and the OT falls; if the NT is right - both the Quran and the NT falls; if the OT is right - both the NT and the Quran falls; if the NT falls - the Quran automatically falls by subsequence [the quran sanctions the NT's immaculate birth while denying the resurrection].The fulcrum, lynch pin here is not resurrection, but immaculate birth - because this factor puts PAID to both the NT and the Quran in one single stroke, while it upholds only the OT. But no other factor can perform that feat. And the answer is blowing in the winds of belief.Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

Source

Andya Primanda, It is my understanding that Christendom and Judaism believe in the "creation stories" from the Torah. So, both sects are exposed to the same issues when it comes to creation vs evolution. As such, if creation is exposed as a mythology then both faiths are a mythology.I am still learning about Islam so give me some time...How did this thread get into this forum?Edited by Force, : add linkEdited by Force, : errEdited by Force, : question....

---

Thanks
To believe in "Force" is to believe in Love, Wisdom, Intelligence, Force, Agility, and Charm.

quote:

---

As such, if creation is exposed as a mythology

---

Christianity was correct in selecting the OT as its foundation. Because, knock, knock: as at this current status quo of state of art science - there is no alternative to Creation. Like what?!Not bad for a 3,500 year document still holding its own with the best of science?

IamJoseph,You're insane.

---

Thanks
To believe in "Force" is to believe in Love, Wisdom, Intelligence, Force, Agility, and Charm.

And you don't have an alternative to creationism.

Joe, baby, if there's no alternative to creationism, all creators require creators.

bluegenes,I am sure that Joe is aware of that my friend. LOL.Edited by Force, : grammar

---

Thanks
To believe in "Force" is to believe in Love, Wisdom, Intelligence, Force, Agility, and Charm.