Free Minds

Science / History / Prophecy => Science => Topic started by: Student of Allah on June 13, 2011, 01:03:44 AM

Title: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Student of Allah on June 13, 2011, 01:03:44 AM
Peace,

I would like to know my the point of view of the members of this site on the subject of Evolution.

By Evolution I mean , Darwinian evolution, evolution by natural selection.


Thanks

Allah guide us

-------------------- Student of Allah
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Magnus on June 13, 2011, 01:34:53 AM
I think there's lots of evidence for evolution. I don't believe that the mutations are random or that the selection is natural.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Student of Allah on June 13, 2011, 02:10:54 AM
Well, as far as I know that the selection is natural and the mutation is random but not random in a blind way. Its directed by the environment and circumstance the creature goes through in it's lifetime.


One of the most amazing thing I ever came across, Evolution.


Allah knows best

------------------ Student of Allah
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Wakas on June 13, 2011, 04:14:14 AM
For verses see:
http://misconceptions-about-islam.com/woman-created-from-rib-adam.htm


Early Muslim scientists, hundreds of years before Darwin, e.g. Ibn Khaldun http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muqaddimah

Quote
One should then take a look at the world of creation. It started out from the minerals and progressed, in an ingenious, gradual manner, to plants and animals. The last stage of minerals is connected with the first stage of plants, such as herbs and seedless plants. The last stage of plants, such as palms and vines, is connected with the first stage of animals, such as snails and shellfish which have only the power of touch. The word 'connection' with regard to these created things means that the last stage of each group is fully prepared to become the first stage of the newest group.

The animal world then widens, its species become numerous, and, in a gradual process of creation, it finally leads to man, who is able to think and reflect. The higher stage of man is reached from the world of monkeys, in which both sagacity and perception are found, but which has not reached the stage of actual reflection and thinking. At this point we come to the first stage of man. This is as far as our (physical) observation extends.

Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: SEid on June 13, 2011, 06:16:27 AM
No such thing as evolution. It's obvious that the original code/program was there with precise 4-bit chemical instructions to divide/copy itself (i.e. backups , replication, error correcting code, delete functions to use computing language) which is all software and little to do with hardware and the 92 natural elements.

Impossible to leave minerals and gases "rubbing" for billions of years and all of a sudden they "awaken" start talking back at you. What happens over time is devolution where parts of the genetic code get damaged as in the case of cancer and other parts of the code adapts or get amplified (e.g. body building or adapting to climate change) while other parts remain dormant. This is easily verified by looking at a growing cell in a baby or a plant; simply add water and it sprouts!

No, the original code was sprinkled on the earth and what a fantastic program and designer.

Peace

 
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Student of Allah on June 13, 2011, 06:27:18 AM
Hello SEid,

Even though I thank you for sharing your view. May be you misunderstood what I was looking for. I was looking for opinions on Evolution. Not kinds of stuff where a tornado flying through a junkyard ends up creating a F-22 Raptor. I dont know you well enough so its difficult for me to understand where you stand, but if I have to base it on your post(one line is enough):

Quote
Impossible to leave minerals and gases "rubbing" for billions of years and all of a sudden they "awaken" start talking back at you.

From the above, it looks like you are talking about a process similar to the F-22 analogy that I have provided. So , in this age of lightning fast internet, it would be better if you get access to books/materials on Evolution and study the basics and come back to tell us your opinion :)

Forgive me if I am mistaken somewhere, I am only a human being :)

Respect.

----------------------- Student of Allah
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Magnus on June 13, 2011, 06:37:53 AM
Well, as far as I know that the selection is natural and the mutation is random but not random in a blind way. Its directed by the environment and circumstance the creature goes through in it's lifetime.

I don't think it's a passive process is all. Lets assume that a particle of cosmic radiation can strike a chromosome in a seed, altering its genetic code and lead to some trait in the plant that will carry over to its descendants. God is surely all-knowing. God is the origin of the cosmic radiation, the DNA, everything. God can alter his creation in any way He chooses.  God brings life and death to everything that lives.

God knows best.
Peace!
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: SEid on June 13, 2011, 08:47:45 AM
Hello Student,

From the above, it looks like you are talking about a process similar to the F-22 analogy that I have provided. So , in this age of lightning fast internet, it would be better if you get access to books/materials on Evolution and study the basics and come back to tell us your opinion :)


All I have to do is look at my Koi fish pond see "the programmed" creatures as old as the earth...

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/bacteria/cyanointro.html

Cyanobacteria are aquatic and photosynthetic, that is, they live in the water, and can manufacture their own food. Because they are bacteria, they are quite small and usually unicellular, though they often grow in colonies large enough to see. They have the distinction of being the oldest known fossils, more than 3.5 billion years old, in fact! It may surprise you then to know that the cyanobacteria are still around; they are one of the largest and most important groups of bacteria on earth.

Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Jafar on June 13, 2011, 02:29:03 PM
I would like to know my the point of view of the members of this site on the subject of Evolution.
By Evolution I mean , Darwinian evolution, evolution by natural selection.

It's true... "Survival Of The Fittest".

For homo sapiens, there's additional criterion..
"Survival Of The Nicest"
Those who are wicked shall be destroyed and their genes and/or social culture shall extinct..
The Ad, Thamud, just to name a few.. and there's also the Incan, Mayan, Aztecs, Nazi Facism..

Soon to be eradicated .. the sectarians, the religio-facism...
Secularism (Non-sectarianism) is on the rise while sectarianism are on demise.. slowly but sure..
http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2009-09-22-no-religion_N.htm

Salam / Peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Student of Allah on June 13, 2011, 05:07:04 PM
Hello Student,

All I have to do is look at my Koi fish pond see "the programmed" creatures as old as the earth...

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/bacteria/cyanointro.html

Cyanobacteria are aquatic and photosynthetic, that is, they live in the water, and can manufacture their own food. Because they are bacteria, they are quite small and usually unicellular, though they often grow in colonies large enough to see. They have the distinction of being the oldest known fossils, more than 3.5 billion years old, in fact! It may surprise you then to know that the cyanobacteria are still around; they are one of the largest and most important groups of bacteria on earth.



Salam SEid,

Earliest life emerged from 4.5-3.5 Billion years ago. And that is well known i believe. One must stop and think that we are talking in BILLIONS of years. a difference of 1 Billion year can not be thought of as similar to difference of a decade. Billion is a huge number.

Anyways, the ingredients of life are still around us, it is adaptation that drives the wheel and makes new kinds of life. So, if the ingredients of life can be present today in the world, i dont see why early forms of simple life "Must" extinct. Evolution is not extinction of a species. Rather, bio diversity.

Let me share something funny : For some people fossils are not valid evidences unless it is against evolution ;)

Peace
Allah knows best

--------------------- Student of Allah
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: kgwithnob on June 13, 2011, 05:43:16 PM
God?s system/SUNNATALLAH

The starting points of all BIG and COMPLEX phenomena are tiny and simple. The process of creation began at subatomic, inorganic (3:59) levels, changing to cellular (4:1), organic, and then embryonic and finally sex specific (49:13) stages, so on and so forth. This requires long, intensive, and tiresome trials and errors, processes of elimination, tests, substitutions of many generations?some one right after another?struggles for existence, through countless recurrences involving minute and gradual changes, resulting in the survival of the fittest, all of which is an unceasing process that carries on to the next stages of creation and evolution.

This is an integral part of God?s way of creating things. In other words, Evolution, or better stated, the Process of Creation, is governed by a set of pre-ordained laws, having a basis, a direction and, consequently, an inevitable and purposeful end/GOAL.

We can observe this absolute ruling of an unchangeable system all over, from subatomic world to inter galactic universes. It is a single uniform, continuous, none-interruptive and harmonious system (31:28), which has never changed in the past and will not change in the future (35:43). That is God?s lawful SYSTEM, or, in other words, SUNNATALLAH.

Considering any exceptions, like explaining the creation of mankind in a different way through philosophy, idealism and age old religious superstitions, will lead us to believe that God?s system (SUNNATALLAH) is a broken, chopped up, none-uniform and discriminatory system that, it?s governing laws change from one form of creation to another. This is the basic belief in paganism?the belief in multiple systems, which inevitably leads to, belief in multiple gods.

According to the Qur?an, the creation of the Universe, the Heavens, and the Earth, did similarly, start out tiny and simple?SIX ?days? (7:54, 10:3, 11:7, 25:59, 32:4, 50:38, 57:4) before the BIG bang (21:30). During these six ?days?, this ?cell/embryo?, ?theHeavensandtheEarth?, was within an ?enclosure? as a collective sum, just like a baby growing in the womb before birth.

During the BIG bang/the NEW BIRTH (21:30), the next stages/the next EIGHT ?days? (41:9-12), of creation and evolution of the UNIVERSE began.

We are now in the latter parts of the FOURTEENTH ?day?, of the creation of the Universe.

The Qur?an informs us about the coming of the Fifteenth/the LAST ?day.? Believing in the Last day is the 2nd article of belief in ISLAM.

The 1st article of belief in our faith, Islam, is to believing-in and worshiping the ONE and ONLY God, ALLAH. 2nd to that, most emphasis has been made on, believing-in the coming of the LAST ?day?. It is named the LAST ?day? because there is no END to it. It is going to be the everlasting ?day? (22:55), thee GOAL, the END RESULT, the PURPOSE of the CREATION as ONE SINGLE LIVING ENTITY, from start to end (31:28).

Human societies as tiny/NEXT TO NOTHING parts of God?s Creation are of no exception and are subject to the same SYSTEM/LAW, following the same path. The ones that follow God?s LAWS more closely/better adaptation, will flourish and last longer to enjoy their existence better and longer than others. Even those who were superior, when corrupted, were annihilated and replaced by better-fitting generations and societies.

Let us contemplate 29:20, which states, ??Roam the Earth and observe how God started the creation??

God wants us to simply observe His creation within the Earth alone, no need to even go anywhere else, just search through the Earth and find out how He started the creation, even our own creation.

Now, if it is not possible for us to roam the Earth and find out for ourselves, we can at least study the works of those who have spent lifetimes doing so. We certainly cannot, and must not, ignore and/or deny the immense works of Charles Darwin, and colleagues of his time, as well as those who came before, and after him. Those are the people who in reality, and as The Qur?an say in 29:20, did roam the Earth, and studied it closely, and carefully recorded in detail, how God started His creation. Their explanation of the process of creation is indeed nearest to the truth.

For ages, the orthodox religions have ?explained? the Universe purely through speculation and unjustifiable interpretations. Afterwards, when confronted with the solid truth of evolutionary creation, started denying it, mocking it, and, in the end, for the sake of their worldly interests, tried to ?prevent? its dispersion [9:32, 61:8]. Their efforts are indeed the reason why the young and educated are generally resentful towards the idea of religion.

We need to rid our minds of the traditional, orthodox, and generally superstitious ways of explaining the verses of the Qur?an. We need to explain things as they really are in the nature, otherwise we will never understand the truth behind our lives and the very world in which we are living. If this is not done we will continue to be among the lost/losers, or KHASIROON. Some of these traditional ideas are as follows:

?   The belief which states that we humans were created in Heaven/Paradise, and used to live there, and then were exiled onto the Earth as a result of committing a horrendous sin, has no Qur?anic basis unless we begin assuming the clear and straightforward message of the Qur?an. The Qur?an tells us that God started the creation of human, not Adam, from clay (32:7), a material part of the Earth itself. Throughout the Qur?an, God explains the different stages of human creation, as well as his EVOLUTION, in a very easy to understand and clear language.
The idea of being a sinner without having a slightest clue in mind or memory of committing such a sin far, far away in the past, does not hold water with God?s system of justice. The Qur?an tells us that even in the Hereafter, we will be carrying a clear record of our deeds of this present life and we ourselves will be enough towards our own reckoning (17:14).

?   The belief that states that the Satan is a temporary god on Earth has no Qur?anic proof either. Satan himself on The Judgment will deny his followers of such a claim and will confess that his Lord is God, Allah (59:16).  

?   There is yet another belief which states that the righteous will not die and go straight to Heaven/Paradise! The Qur?an, in three different verses, 3:185, 21:35 and 29:57, tells us that every living creature/soul will taste the death. In 39:30, the prophet Muhammad is told very clearly that he will certainly be among the dead, just as everyone else will. According to The Qur?an, Hereafter or The Last Day (and consequently, Paradise and Hell) are events of the future/the LAST ?DAY? (29:20), the next stage of the evolution of the Universe, and do not yet exist.

?   The belief that states the first FORTY years of our life is just a grace period and those who die before age of forty go straight to Heaven/Paradise, forgiven of all their sins, has no Qur?anic basis. And considering that, in two verses, 4:48 and 4:116, God tells us very plainly that He does NOT forgive the sin of SHIRK, i.e., associating partners with Him. I am sure there have been multitudes of people in the past that have died before the age of forty, maintaining ideologically polytheistic beliefs until their death, and consequently would NOT end up in Heaven/Paradise.

Peace,
Khalil
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: uq on June 13, 2011, 06:27:20 PM
The body of evidence which supports the theory is overwhelming, and I don't see anything in the Quran to refute the theory as it's presented today.

If anything, one could make the argument that the Quran itself establishes evolution by using verses which imply that organisms are a product of the earth, and that all organisms are related, and that we have been created in stages.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Student of Allah on June 13, 2011, 07:43:22 PM
Salam,

So I am not alone in rejecting the non-Quranic relgious bias of those flat earth creationists ? cool... kgwithnob put it very nicely, "Evolution, the process of creation".


PEACE

----------- Student of Allah
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: san on June 13, 2011, 08:03:22 PM
Impossible to leave minerals and gases "rubbing" for billions of years and all of a sudden they "awaken" start talking back at you. What happens over time is devolution where parts of the genetic code get damaged as in the case of cancer and other parts of the code adapts or get amplified (e.g. body building or adapting to climate change) while other parts remain dormant.

Don't forget aging ;)
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: drsam on June 24, 2011, 10:16:23 AM
kgwithnob just refuted not the traditional beliefs he just refuted the beliefs of edip yuksel 
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: raginggaijin on July 15, 2011, 08:39:27 PM
Reply to post given here:

http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9602635.msg281863#msg281863

Highlight above is from me.

I mean they are different in ESSENCE, made of two different substances, as we read in verse 7:12 below.
قَالَ مَا مَنَعَكَ أَلَّا تَسۡجُدَ إِذۡ أَمَرۡتُكَ‌ۖ قَالَ أَنَا۟ خَيۡرٌ۬ مِّنۡهُ خَلَقۡتَنِى مِن نَّارٍ۬ وَخَلَقۡتَهُ ۥ مِن طِينٍ۬
He said: What hindered thee that thou didst not fall prostrate when I bade thee? (Iblis) said: I am better than him. Thou createdst me of fire while him Thou didst create of mud.

Peace,
Khalil

Iblis isn't a Jinn. Iblis is of (mina) the Jinn; arrogant, proud, disobedient, and among the first creation made before Nasi. Allah even expounds upon their creation:

"I made them not witnesses of the creation of the heavens and earth, neither of the creation of themselves; I would not ever take those who lead others astray to be My supporters." Surah 18:51

"And when We said to the angels, 'Bow yourselves to Adam'; so they bowed themselves, save Iblis; he was (kana) of (mina) the jinn (aljinni), he rebelled (fafasaqa) against (AAan) his Lord's command (amri rabbih). What, and do you take him and his offspring to be your friends, apart from Me, and they an enemy to you? How evil is that exchange for the evildoers!" Surah 18:50

Iblis is an angel - malikatan. No where does Allah command any but the malikatan to bow before Adam (pbuh).

"And when We said to the angels, 'Bow yourselves to Adam'; so they bowed themselves, save Iblis; he refused, and waxed proud, and so he was (wakana) of (mina) the unbelievers."
Surah 2:34

"We created you, then We shaped you, then We said to the angels: 'Bow yourselves to Adam'; so they bowed themselves, save Iblis -- he was not of those that bowed themselves."
Surah 7:11

"save Iblis; he refused to be among those bowing." Surah 15:31

"And when We said to the angels, 'Bow yourselves to Adam'; so they bowed themselves, save Iblis; he refused." Surah 20:116


As the Jinn were disobedient human beings prior to the creation of Nasi, they are the offspring of Iblis: Among the first created, rebelling against the command of Allah, and leading others astray.

So while you try to make Iblis into a Jinn, Iblis is actually a malikatan - a controlling force commanded to be made subject to man, but Iblis refused.

The angels are the controlling forces of this world created by Allah; the forces of nature made subject to man through the knowledge given to us by Allah: Science.

Subjected (sakhara): Surah 16:14, 22:65, 67:15
? It is He who made the earth subjected to you; therefore walk in its tracts, and eat of His provision; to Him is the Uprising.? Surah 67:15

?It is He who subjected to you the sea, that you may eat of it fresh flesh, and bring forth out of it ornaments for you to wear; and thou mayest see the ships cleaving through it; and that you may seek of His bounty, and so haply you will be thankful.? Surah 16:14

?Hast thou not seen how that God has subjected to you all that is in the earth and the ships to run upon the sea at His commandment, and He holds back heaven lest it should fall upon the earth, save by His leave? Surely God is All-gentle to men, All-compassionate.? Surah 22:65

So if angels control the forces of nature, what part of nature does Iblis control?

Human nature. Iblis controls our free will. Such is the nature of humans: To disobey our Creator and follow our own carnal/earthly desires by listening to that voice in their heart that tells them to disobey.

Our soul (alnnafsa) whisper to us: Surah 12:53, 50:16, 5:30, 114:5

"Then his soul prompted him to slay his brother, and he slew him, and became one of the losers." Surah 5:30

"Yet I claim not that my soul was innocent -- surely the soul incites to evil -- except inasmuch as my Lord had mercy; truly my Lord is All-forgiving, All-compassionate.'"
Surah 12:53

"We indeed created humans (al-insana); and We know what his soul whispers within him, and We are nearer to him than the jugular vein." Surah 50:16

"who whispers in the breasts of Nasi" Surah 114:5

Our brain - a hemisphere on the right and a hemisphere on the left - records every thought, every deed: Surah 50:16-18

Angels, and that includes Iblis, are not humans.
Jinn are not angels, as the angels do not disobey Allah.

"The Messiah will not disdain to be a servant of God, neither the angels who are near stationed to Him. Whosoever disdains to serve Him, and waxes proud, He will assuredly muster them to Him, all of them." Surah 4:172

"the thunder proclaims His praise, and the angels, in awe of Him. He looses the thunderbolts, and smites with them whomsoever He will; yet they dispute about God, who is mighty in power." Surah 13:13

"We offered the trust to the heavens and the earth and the mountains, but they refused to carry it and were afraid of it; and mankind carried it. Surely he is sinful, very foolish."  Surah 33:72

"Believers, guard yourselves and your families against a Fire whose fuel is men and stones, and over which are harsh, terrible angels who disobey not God in what He commands them and do what they are commanded." Surah 66:6

"Upon the day when the Spirit and the angels stand in ranks they shall speak not, save him to whom the All-merciful has given leave, and who speaks aright."
Surah 78:38

No where in the Quran is any other angel disobedient but Iblis.

Iblis was created to rebel:

"He said, "Now, for that Thou hast misled me (aghwaytanee), surely in thy straight path will I lay wait for them:" Surah 7:16

"Said he, 'My Lord, for Thy perverting me I shall deck all fair to them in the earth, and I shall pervert them, all together," Surah 15:39

Allah is in control of everything. Allah told the angels He knew something they did not. If He chooses to lead anyone astray, no one can guide them.

"What is the matter with you, then, that you have become two parties about the hypocrites, while Allah has made them return for what they have earned? Do you wish to guide him whom Allah has caused to err (adalla)? And whomsoever Allah causes to err (yudlili), you shall by no means find a way for him." Surah 4:88

Jinn are not angels.
You are more than welcome to believe Jinn are spiritual creatures that do evil around the world.
But I cannot as the Quran does not teach it.

Peace.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: kgwithnob on July 15, 2011, 09:18:51 PM
...So while you try to make Iblis into a Jinn, Iblis is actually a malikatan - a controlling force commanded to be made subject to man, but Iblis refused...
Peace.
Highlight is from me.

According to The Qur?aan both the JINNS & IBLIS, are of the same ESSENCE in CREATION, i.e. both are made of FIRE. In that case, and as The Qur?aan says in verse 18:50, he is from among the JINNS.
وَإِذۡ قُلۡنَا لِلۡمَلَـٰٓٮِٕكَةِ ٱسۡجُدُواْ لِأَدَمَ فَسَجَدُوٓاْ إِلَّآ إِبۡلِيسَ كَانَ مِنَ ٱلۡجِنِّ فَفَسَقَ عَنۡ أَمۡرِ رَبِّهِۦۤۗ أَفَتَتَّخِذُونَهُ ۥ وَذُرِّيَّتَهُ ۥۤ أَوۡلِيَآءَ مِن دُونِى وَهُمۡ لَكُمۡ عَدُوُّۢۚ بِئۡسَ لِلظَّـٰلِمِينَ بَدَلاً۬

I did NOT try to make Iblis into a Jinn. As the above verse informs us, Iblis is from the Jinn.

Peace,
Khalil
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Student of Allah on July 15, 2011, 10:01:44 PM
Salam Raggin-Taggin and Knightworth(actually kdwithnob, but my brain reads it that way,cant help it),

I cant help but ask, what has this gotta do with Theory of Evolution ?


Peace be on you

------------------------ Student of Allah

Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: The Dreamer on July 15, 2011, 11:52:52 PM
Raginggaijin:

"And the Jinn race, We had created before, from the fire of a scorching wind." (15:27)

"And He created Jinns from fire free of smoke" (55:15)
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: raginggaijin on July 16, 2011, 09:15:29 AM
Salam Raggin-Taggin and Knightworth(actually kdwithnob, but my brain reads it that way,cant help it),

I cant help but ask, what has this gotta do with Theory of Evolution ?


Peace be with you,

This was a response to kgwithnob in the thread about the qiblah, after I brought up the Jinn and Birds. I'll repost the reply to him for consistency:

http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9602528.msg281821#msg281821

This is the superstition I have to deal with...

I want you to notice what you just posted:

"We created aforetime from the smokeless flame of fire."

The Jinn were created before the Nasi.

I also want you to note you are using the Arabic word for 'Jinn', but you translate (Nasi) into 'Man'. So already a deception is occurring. But we'll get to that.

Jinn were created before Nasi, which shows Nasi are successors of the Jinn. This is upheld in the Quran.

Successor (Khalif): Surah 2:30, 3:170, 4:9, 6:133, 6:165, 7:17, 7:69, 7:74, 7:142, 7:150, 7:169, 9:118, 10:14, 10:73, 10:92, 13:11, 19:59, 21:28, 22:76, 27:62, 34:9, 35:39, 36:9, 36:45, 38:26, 41:14, 41:25, 41:42, 43:60, 46:21, 67:15, 72:27
?And when thy Lord said to the angels, 'I am setting in the earth a successor (khaleefatan).' They said, 'What, wilt Thou set therein one who will do corruption there, and shed blood, while We proclaim Thy praise and call Thee Holy?' He said, 'Assuredly I know that you know not.'? Surah 2:30

"What, do you wonder that a reminder from your Lord should come to you by the lips of a man from among you? That he may warn you; and remember when He appointed you as successors (khulafaa) after the people of Noah, and increased you in stature broadly; remember God's bounties; haply you will prosper.'"
Surah 7:69

"And there succeeded after them a succession who inherited the Book, taking the chance goods of this lower world, and saying, 'It will be forgiven us'; and if chance goods the like of them come to them, they will take them. Has not the compact of the Book been taken touching them, that they should say concerning God nothing but the truth? And they have studied what is in it; and the Last Abode is better for those who are godfearing. Do you not understand?" Surah 7:169

"And to the three who were left behind (khullifoo), until, when the earth became strait for them, for all its breadth, and their souls became strait for them, and they thought that there was no shelter from God except in Him, then He turned towards them, that they might also turn; surely God turns, and is All-compassionate." Surah 9:118

"Had We willed, We would have made angels among you successors (yakhlufoona) in the earth."
Surah 43:60

Allah states clearly Nasi are made from the seed of another people.

"Thy Lord is All-sufficient, Merciful. If He will, He can put you away, and leave after you, to succeed you (wayastakhlif), what He will, as He produced you from the seed (dhurriyyati) of another (ākharīna) people (qawmin)." Surah 6:133

He even gives details how Adam (pbuh) was made.

?He is the Knower of the Unseen and the Visible, the All-mighty, the All-compassionate, Who has created all things well. And He originated the creation of humans (al-insani) of clay (min teenin), then He fashioned his descendant (naslahu) of an extraction (sulalatin) of low (maheenin) water (ma-in), then He shaped (sawwahu) him, and breathed His spirit (roohihi) in him. And He appointed for you hearing, and sight, and hearts; little thanks you show.? Surah 32:6-9

There is only one Nasi spoken of in the Quran who was shaped and had Allah's ruh breathed into him - Adam (pbuh): Surah 15:29, 32:9, 38:72

If all human beings sprung from the joining of one couple, Allah would not make distinction between the bloodline of the Prophets (pbut), as we all would be from the seed of Adam (pbuh).

(dhurriyyatī) offspring: Surah 2:124, 2:128, 2:266, 3:34, 3:36, 3:38, 4:9, 6:84, 6:87, 6:133, 7:172, 7:173, 10:83, 13:38, 14:37, 14:40, 17:3, 17:62, 18:50, 19:58, 29:27, 36:41, 37:77, 37:113, 46:15, 52:21, 57:26
Seed of Adam: Surah 3:33, 6:83-87, 7:172, 17:2-3, 19:58. 57:26

?We have honoured the Children of Adam and carried them on land and sea, and provided them with good things, and preferred them greatly over many of those We created.? Surah 17:70

"That is Our argument, which We bestowed upon Abraham as against his people. We raise up in degrees whom We will; surely thy Lord is All-wise, All-knowing.
And We gave to him Isaac and Jacob -- each one We guided, And Noah We guided before; and of his seed (dhurriyyatihi) David and Solomon, Job and Joseph, Moses and Aaron -- even so We recompense the good-doers -- Zachariah and John, Isa and Elias; each was of the righteous; Ishmael and Elisha, Jonah and Lot - each one We preferred above all beings; and of their fathers, and of their seed (wadhurriyyātihim), and of their brethren (wa-ikh'wānihim); and We elected them, and We guided them to a straight path."
Surah 6:83-87

"And We gave Moses the Book, and made it a guidance to the Children of Israel: 'Take not unto yourselves any guardian apart from Me.' The seed (dhurriyyata) of those We bore with Noah; he was a thankful servant." Surah 17:2-3

"These are they whom God has blessed among the Prophets of the seed (dhurriyyati) of Adam, and of those We bore with Noah, and of the seed (dhurriyyati) of Abraham and Israel, and of those We guided and chose. When the signs of the All-merciful were recited to them, they fell down prostrate, weeping." Surah 19:58

"And We sent Noah, and Abraham, and We appointed the Prophecy and the Book to be among their seed (dhurriyyatihimā); and some of them are guided, and many of them are ungodly."
Surah 57:26

The Jinn are human beings.

Jinn are Christians ? Byzantines ? who accepted the Quran: Surah 72:1-18
Jinn are Yahudians ? Persians ? who accepted the Quran: Surah 46:29-30
Jew and Christian polytheists who lead astray: Surah 2:105, 2:120, 2:135, 2:140, 3:67, 3:95, 3:151, 3:186, 5:82, 6:106, 6:137, 6:161, 9:31-33, 10:105, 16:120, 22:17, 98:1-6

Jinn are foreigners among Nasi: Surah 6:128-131, 22:17, 34:12-13, 7:38, 7:179
'Ajam' ? ?Non-Arab? or ?Persian?: Surah 16:103, 41:44, 26:198
Roman-Persian wars: Surah 30:2-4, 105:1-5
Solomon?s Jinn in Quran: Surah 27:16-41, 34:12-13
Solomon's Jinn in previous Books: I Kings 5:13-17, II Chron. 2:17-18, II Chron. 4:4-6

But, but, but... They are made of SMOKELESS FIRE!!!!!!!111111111oneoneoneoneleventeen.


The same people who uphold these superstitious beliefs are often among the many who point to the scientific miracles in the Quran.

One such miracle is Surah 21:30:

"Have not the unbelievers then beheld that the heavens and the earth were a mass all sewn up, and then We unstitched them and of water fashioned every living thing? Will they not believe?"
Surah 21:30

This is from the Arberry Quran, translated in 1950. The Yusuf Ali Quran, translated in the 1920s reads:

"Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" Surah 21:30

In 1978, the Nobel Prize was awarded for the theory of the Big Bang. This theory postulates that the universe was one mass - a monoblock - that was blown apart and sent out into the void.

Press release for 1978 Nobel Peace Prize:
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1978/press.html

"A theory developed by the American physicist Gamow and his associates suggested that this synthesis took place at the beginning of the existence of the universe. It is known from studies of the spectra of stars and galaxies that the universe is at present expanding uniformly. This means that at a certain point, 15 billion years ago, the universe was very compact; it is thus tempting to assume that the universe was created by a cosmic explosion, or 'big bang', although other explanations are possible. This 'big bang' theory implies the occurrence of very high temperatures, of about 10 billion degrees. Only at those temperatures can various nuclear reactions take place such that chemical elements could be built up from the elementary particles assumed to be present from the very beginning."

Here Scientists - the largest group of unbelievers I know of who cannot believe in something without proof - are showing how the components of all life and matter in the universe was created in this one Big Bang of intense heat and expansion.

Let's repeat that: "This 'big bang' theory implies the occurrence of very high temperatures, of about 10 billion degrees."
This 'big bang' theory implies the occurrence of very high temperatures, of about 10 billion degrees.
This 'big bang' theory implies the occurrence of very high temperatures, of about 10 billion degrees.

Jinn created before Nasi of a released, scorching fire:  Surah 15:27, 55:15
?And He created (Wakhalaqa) the jinn of (aljanna min) release (marijin) of fire (min narin).? Surah 55:15
?and the jinn created We before of fire scorching (alssamoomi).? Surah 15:27

While someone who upholds superstition sees evil fire creatures lurking in the aether, I see the intense heat of the Big Bang creating the components of all life itself.

You would think, if the Quran still speaks of the Jinn, there would be some way to know them from the Nasi. After all, Allah makes it clear in Surah 114:5-6 that the Jinn are part of the Nasi:

"Allathee yuwaswisu fee sudoori alnnasi Mina aljinnati waalnnasi" 114:5-6
"who whispers in the breasts of nasi, of jinn and nasi.'" Surah 114:5-6

If we are ALL Nasi, but there are still Jinn in and among the Nasi, there must be some indication of these Jinn that still remains if they are humans, right? If the Quran says it, then we should find some indication of it.

Neanderthal DNA still found in modern Homo Sapiens:

Neanderthals, Humans Interbred?First Solid DNA Evidence:
"The next time you're tempted to call some oaf a Neanderthal, you might want to take a look in the mirror.
According to a new DNA study, most humans have a little Neanderthal in them?at least 1 to 4 percent of a person's genetic makeup.
The study uncovered the first solid genetic evidence that "modern" humans?or Homo sapiens?interbred with their Neanderthal neighbors, who mysteriously died out about 30,000 years ago.
What's more, the Neanderthal-modern human mating apparently took place in the Middle East, shortly after modern humans had left Africa, not in Europe?as has long been suspected."


Read more: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/05/100506-science-neanderthals-humans-mated-interbred-dna-gene/

Study: Neanderthal DNA Lives On in Modern Humans

"Still, other paleoanthropologists say the discovery is not entirely unexpected. There is ample archaeological evidence ? including tools, habitation sites and fossils ? that Neanderthals and early modern humans may have coexisted in the Middle East as much as 80,000 years ago, and certainly in Europe 30,000 to 45,000 years ago. What has been missing until now is the genetic evidence.

"The fact that they found it across the board says that the evidence must be very widespread across modern humans," says Erik Trinkaus, an anthropologist at Washington University in St. Louis, Mo., who has long argued that the human fossils he has studied in France, Romania, the Czech Republic and other places show mixed ancestry. "If you can find evidence [of Neanderthals] after 30,000 years of [human] genetic shifting, then it must have been pretty important or prominent then." Trinkaus speculates that the genetic flow between Neanderthals and early modern humans might have been as high as 10% to 20%.
The new finding may prompt a tweaking of the well-known Out of Africa theory, which in its strictest interpretation says a small group of early modern humans left Africa and outcompeted and replaced all other hominids without any interbreeding. The alternate theory, known as multiregionalism, argues that distinct populations of modern humans developed simultaneously around the world and along the same evolutionary lines by swapping genes.
"What we falsify here is the very hard Out of Africa theory," said P??bo. "We show that outside Africa there is this 1% to 4% that came from archaic humans. Of course, it's totally possible that archaic forms that we don't know contributed to Africans today. I don't think we should take this as evidence that only people outside Africa have some 'caveman' biology within them."
According to Trinkaus, many paleoanthropologists have long believed that early modern humans and Neanderthals interbred. "People have been saying this for decades," he argues. "The minority position was the position that there was no gene flow. Most people who work with the fossil record support some level of admixture."

Whatever our mixing, it is human uniqueness that has also been revealed by the sequencing. By comparing the Neanderthal genome with those of modern humans, the team identified a small number of genetic changes that were newly evolved in modern humans. Some of the changes may have arisen as a result of genetic drift, but others seem to have been positively selected for ? meaning they swept through populations rapidly, possibly because they gave us some advantage."


Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1987568-2,00.html

So we do find remnants of the Jinn - Neanderthal man - who was created before Homo Sapien man. We find this in the DNA of Homo Sapien - the Nasi.

I don't believe in a 'Creation' theory, where 'man' was *poof* suddenly made after an old man in a beard rolled up his sleeves and sculpted him.
I don't believe in a 'Evolution' theory, where 'man' is a series of lucky breaks in evolutionary shifts in such a manner that it is a leap of faith in and of itself.
I believe in an Intervention theory, where Allah guided the path of each successor. Allah says 'Be' and it is, and it is in accord with the Sunnah He has instilled into this world. A world that upholds logic, reason, and evidence-based research.

Why would someone want to hide that Jinn are humans, who hold the same ties to Nasi?

"Say: 'If the Last Abode with God is yours exclusively, and not for other people, then long for death -- if you speak truly.'" Surah 2:94
"Say: 'You of Jewry, if you assert that you are the friends of God, apart from other men, then do you long for death, if you speak truly.'" Surah 62:6

Hebrew ?nasi? נָשִׂיא: president, prince, ruler
Lev. 4:22, Eze. 44:2-18, Ezra 1:8

What are the common translations for 'Nasi' in Arabic النَّاسِ: men, people, rulers/viceroys

From the Babylonian Talmud:
Sanhedrin 57a: When a Jew murders a gentile ("Cuthean"), there will be no death penalty. What a Jew steals from a gentile he may keep.
Baba Kamma 37b: The gentiles are outside the protection of the law and God has "exposed their money to Israel."
Baba Kamma 113a: Jews may use lies ("subterfuges") to circumvent a Gentile.
Yebamoth 98a. All gentile children are animals.
Abodah Zarah 36b: Gentile girls are in a state of niddah (filth) from birth.
Abodah Zarah 22a-22b: Gentiles prefer sex with cows.
Baba Mezia 24a: If a Jew finds an object lost by a gentile ("heathen") it does not have to be returned. (Affirmed also in Baba Kamma 113b).

"Say: "The Truth has arrived, and falsehood neither originates, nor reproduces." Surah 34:49

It's the same false teachings recycled into what is taught in the religions of man.

"Some of the Jews pervert words from their meanings saying, 'We have heard and we disobey' and 'Hear, and be thou not given to hear' and 'Observe us,' twisting with their tongues and traducing religion. If they had said, 'We have heard and obey' and 'Hear' and 'Regard us,' it would have been better for them, and more upright; but God has cursed them for their unbelief so they believe not except a few."
Surah 4:46

"People of the Book, now there has come to you Our Messenger, making clear to you many things you have been concealing of the Book, and effacing many things. There has come to you from God a light, and a Book Manifest" Surah 5:15

"Then the evildoers of them substituted a saying other than that which had been said to them; so We sent down upon them wrath out of heaven for their evildoing." Surah 7:162

And let's not forget the Birds.

?And Solomon was David's heir, and he said, 'Nasi (alnnasu), we have been taught the speech of the birds (alttayri), and we have been given of everything; surely this is indeed the manifest bounty.'? Surah 27:16

Solomon wasn't the only person who knew 'the speech of birds'. The Nasi were taught it as well.
Phoenicia(from the Greek Greek: Φοινίκη: Phoin?kē), was an ancient civilization in Canaan which covered most of the western, coastal part of the fertile Crescent. "Phoenicia" is really a Classical Greek term used to refer to the region of the major Canaanite port towns, and does not correspond exactly to a cultural identity that would have been recognised by the Phoenicians themselves. It is uncertain to what extent the Phoenicians viewed themselves as a single ethnicity. Their civilization was organized in city-states, similar to ancient Greece. However In terms of archaeology, language, life style and religion, there is little to set the Phoenicians apart as markedly different from other cultures of Canaan. As Canaanites, they were unique in their remarkable seafaring achievements.
Around 1600 B.C. the Phoenicians invented 22 ?magic signs? called the alphabet, and passed them onto the world. The Phoenicians gave the alphabet to the Greeks who adopted it; the evolution of the Phoenician Alphabet to Etruscan alphabet to the Latin letters of present-day. The Phoenicians were the first state-level society to make extensive use of the alphabet. The Phoenician phonetic alphabet is generally believed to be the ancestor of almost all modern alphabets, although it did not contain any vowels (these were added later by the Greeks). From a traditional linguistic perspective, they spoke Phoenician, a Canaanite dialect. However, due to the very slight differences in language, and the insufficient records of the time, whether Phoenician formed a separate and united dialect, or was merely a superficially defined part of a broader language continuum, is unclear. Through their maritime trade, the Phoenicians spread the use of the alphabet to North Africa and Europe, where it was adopted by the Greeks, who later passed it on to the Etruscans, who in turn transmitted it to the Romans.

Hudhud, aka 'Hoopoe' - the bird with the crest on it's head?

(http://creagrus.home.montereybay.com/Hoopoe_madj-crest.jpg)

A Greek helmet
(http://www.lawrensnest.com/images/GRK6058BP.jpg)

(The Hoopoe is also Israel's National Bird, for those interested.)

The Phoenicans were assimilated into the Greek empire, which was assimilated into the Roman empire to become the Byzantine Empire. What is the flag of the Byzantine Empire?

(http://www.glogster.com/media/4/13/31/47/13314752.png)

But hey, I'm the crazy one. Right?

This is where your superstition gets you into trouble, as you lay your beliefs over what is actually taught.

There are 3 types of people described in the Quran.

3 types of people: Surah 7:46-48, 56:7-11
1. The Foremost
2. The People of the Right Hand
3. The People of the Left Hand
 
The Foremost/Outstrippers are:
"a throng of the ancients and how few of the later folk." Surah 56:13-14
 
The People of the Right Hand are:
"A throng of the ancients and a throng of the later folk." Surah 56:39-40
  
Allah names both partitions, 'The ancients (al-awwaleena) and the later folk (waal-akhireena)' in Surah 56:49
The People of the Left Hand abide in the Fire. Surah 56:49-56

The two Gardens are for the Foremost and the People of the Right Hand.

The Foremost are in elevated rank, and are in better reward in the Hereafter. Allah teaches of the believers in Paradise, those in the Ramparts, and those in the Fire:

"The inhabitants of Paradise will call to the inhabitants of the Fire: 'We have found that. which our Lord promised us true; have you found what your Lord promised you true?' 'Yes,' they will say. And then a herald shall proclaim between them: 'God's curse is on the evildoers
who bar from God's way, desiring to make it crooked, disbelieving in the world to come.
And between them is a veil, and on the Ramparts are men knowing each by their mark, who shall call to the inhabitants of Paradise: 'Peace be upon you! They have not entered it, for all their eagerness.'" Surah 7:44-46

So the Ramparts are one Garden for the Foremost, while the other Garden is for the People of the Right Hand, who are believers but are not foremost in deeds.

Now, you are more than welcome to believe in invisible fire spirits, and that Allah sculpted a man out of clay and made him come alive like Pinocchio, and that Prophets (pbut) were able to speak to birds in a Walt Disney fashion.
But don't expect me to believe it when there is no proof for it.

Peace.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: raginggaijin on July 16, 2011, 09:20:25 AM
Raginggaijin:

"And the Jinn race, We had created before, from the fire of a scorching wind." (15:27)

"And He created Jinns from fire free of smoke" (55:15)

Proof: GOD
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzcVu-CpzXQ

Proof: Jinn
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwjC7dEMkDU

Proof: Birds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyEpjv2nAho

Feel free to uphold teachings of the ancients of evil spirits and boogeymen.
The Quran does not uphold the teachings of the ancients, so I cannot believe as you believe.
I believe Jinn are the race of humans that preceded Nasi.

Peace.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: AlboDibran on July 16, 2011, 04:39:51 PM
In the end Allah knows best. Raging Gaijinn its me Hamit from youtube =D lol. Personally It makes absolute and logical sense that Jinn are humans. reasonable logic tells me it makes absolutely no sense how humans take refuge with invisible spirits. It also makes no sense that an invisible spirit with no physical body no organs, no sperm, can copulate with a human. When such biological mixing is impossible between certain animals, let alone a fire race and a human. Also since fire is a form of energy or element, it is not subject to physical decay and death. So as I understand, Logically speaking Jinn are humans. Also the fact for genetic differences makes one wonder. Either Adam was the first nasi, and jin are not human. or it presents a contradiction. as if all humans are from adam directly why genetic variance? Allah knows best though. I am not a scientist. However the only thing I do not agree with. Or rather let me rephrase that, dont have much knowledge or understanding of. Is this whole Iblis being an Angel. If I remember correctly unless the verse is wrongly translated. Is that Allah says he will throw Iblis in hell with all those who he misguided. So It also leades to the question. who is the "Iblis" on other planets? If Iblis is employed to tempt us. what tempts other creations in the universe? But then its pointless to probe our minds in such things. Logically speaking Jinn cant be spirits. However this presents the dilemma where many are advocating angels are humans as well. Like Aidad Safar, and some other Quranist groups. It makes absolutely no sense. Have you read any of there work? When I ask for evidence they never really provide any. Just persist in a rant that angels not being human is superstitious. lol. Salam brothers/sisters
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: raginggaijin on July 16, 2011, 06:28:43 PM
In the end Allah knows best. Raging Gaijinn its me Hamit from youtube =D lol. Personally It makes absolute and logical sense that Jinn are humans. reasonable logic tells me it makes absolutely no sense how humans take refuge with invisible spirits. It also makes no sense that an invisible spirit with no physical body no organs, no sperm, can copulate with a human. When such biological mixing is impossible between certain animals, let alone a fire race and a human. Also since fire is a form of energy or element, it is not subject to physical decay and death. So as I understand, Logically speaking Jinn are humans. Also the fact for genetic differences makes one wonder. Either Adam was the first nasi, and jin are not human. or it presents a contradiction. as if all humans are from adam directly why genetic variance? Allah knows best though. I am not a scientist.

Peace be with you,

Allah tells us He gave us hearts, minds, and eyes, but many are ungrateful. Trust in Him to explain, and turn to Him for guidance. Ask Him for knowledge and watch Him fill you up with it. :)
I think that is the hardest part of serving Allah. Truly trusting in Him for all your needs, including understanding the Quran.

However the only thing I do not agree with. Or rather let me rephrase that, dont have much knowledge or understanding of. Is this whole Iblis being an Angel. If I remember correctly unless the verse is wrongly translated. Is that Allah says he will throw Iblis in hell with all those who he misguided. So It also leades to the question. who is the "Iblis" on other planets? If Iblis is employed to tempt us. what tempts other creations in the universe?

Allah is Lord of all beings (alAAalameena). Surah 1:2, 2:47

"Those are they whom God has guided; so follow their guidance. Say: 'I ask of you no wage for it; it is but a reminder unto all beings.'" Surah 6:90

So if there are other beings on other planets, then by upholding the sunnatil Allahi - the Way of Allah - they too will have their own battles with Iblis, their Free Will: Ego.

Ego - our Free Will.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ralgm95jeM

They will have evil whispered to them from their souls, as proven by the ayats given above. If it is done a certain way here, it will be the same everywhere. Allah does not change His way.

If Iblis is our Free Will, it will be thrown into the Fire with all the Jinn and Nasi, because they all possess Free Will, an Ego, to be burned out of them by the purification of the Fire.

But then its pointless to probe our minds in such things. Logically speaking Jinn cant be spirits. However this presents the dilemma where many are advocating angels are humans as well. Like Aidad Safar, and some other Quranist groups. It makes absolutely no sense. Have you read any of there work? When I ask for evidence they never really provide any. Just persist in a rant that angels not being human is superstitious. lol. Salam brothers/sisters

Don't believe without proof. If they cannot provide proof for their beliefs, then why believe them?

I do know the word 'malik' contains other uses besides 'angels' as for example (malikun) used for 'Kings' as found in Surah 2:246, 2:247, 5:20, 12:43, 12:50, 12:54, 12:72, 12:76, 18:79 (and there are more.) It also means 'Master' as we see in Surah 1:4, 3:26, 36:71. These are all positions of control, dominion.

But Allah is clear about the difference between angels and men. Allah even states if He sent an angel (malakun), they would look like men making the matter even more confused, as they are already confusing the issue as to what angels truly are.

"'Why has an angel (malakun) not been sent down on him?' they say; yet had We sent down an angel (malakun), the matter would have been determined, and then no respite would be given them.
And had We made him an angel (malakan), yet assuredly We would have made him a man (rajulan), and confused for them the thing which they themselves are confusing."
Surah 6:8-9

I used to believe in the idea of angels being robes males with wings who fly around doing the will of Allah. Now, I can't see them in that nature but as the forces that do the command of Allah as He tells them to.

What will it appear as when the angels are sent down to settle the matter on this earth?

"Upon the day that heaven is split asunder with the clouds and the angels are sent down in majesty, the Kingdom that day, the true Kingdom, shall belong to the All-merciful and it shall be a day harsh for the unbelievers." Surah 25:25-26

"What do they look for, but that God shall come to them in the shadows of the clouds, and the angels? The matter is determined, and unto God all matters are returned." Surah 2:210

"And if they should see a portion of the heaven coming down, they would say: Piled up clouds." Surah 52:44

There are humans, mortals (basharan), men (rijalun) who are servants of Allah who are chosen to do His will, given the spirit of His command (ruhi bin amrihi). But there is no proof in the Quran that angels manifested on this earth in the form of mortals (basharan) or men (rijalun).  Proof is given above. Please check it out for yourself. :)

The Quran truly contains an explanation and a description of all things. But don't expect to be in a majority. Allah warns that there are few believers. Surah 11:40, 51:36, 38:24, 34:20, 7:3, 61:2-3, 6:116, 33:1-2
So even among people who say they serve only Allah, there are people who are misguided.

"And some Nasi there are who say, 'We believe in God and the Last Day'; but they are not believers. They would trick God and the believers, and only themselves they deceive, and they are not aware." Surah 2:8-9

Don't be concerned about the majority or unity. Strive first and foremost to serve Allah in the best of your ability, and serving Him alone. Ask Him for explanation of the Quran, and be patient. Study the Quran diligently and do not depend on anyone's opinion, and that includes me. Only Allah is Guide. He is Friend to the believers.

There is a reason why I left all those groups. Allah is sufficient for me. Surah 3:173, 4:45, 4:70, 4:79, 4:81, 4:132, 4:166, 4:171, 8:62, 8:64, 9:59, 9:129, 10:29, 13:43, 17:96, 29:52, 33:3, 33:39, 39:36, 39:38, 48:28, 65:3

Allah gave us a heart, eyes, and a mind. Be among the grateful and use them! :D
And if we disagree, so what? We aren't responsible for each other, only ourselves.
Let us vie among each other in doing good deeds. Allah will sort us out in the End. ;)

May Allah increase us in knowledge.

Peace and blessings.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: AlboDibran on July 16, 2011, 07:37:59 PM
Brother, if they didnt come appearing as mortals who was it that spoke to marrry? Or delivered the glad tidings to Abraham, Noah. and revealed the Quran to Muhammad. Maybw I misread what you wrote. or did it all occur in a dream? Salam
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: raginggaijin on July 16, 2011, 08:54:28 PM
Brother, if they didnt come appearing as mortals who was it that spoke to marrry?

A mortal man.
No where in Surah 19 does it speak of a (malakun). There is only a mortal (basharun).

I can't make anyone see that, even when the Arabic is shown:

"Faittakhathat min doonihim hijaban faarsalna ilayha roohana fatamaththala laha basharan sawiyyan" Surah 19:17

Do you see (malakun) there? No.
Do you see (rijalun) there? No.
Do you see (basharun) there? Yes.

"Then she took (Faittakhathat) from (min) beside them (doonihim) a screen (hijaban), then We sent (faarsalna) to here (ilayha) Our spirit (roohana) his likeness (fatamaththala) it is (laha) mortal (basharan) well-proportioned (sawiyyan)." Surah 19:17

Look up the word 'likeness' also translated as 'description':

"And had We willed, We would have raised him up thereby; but he inclined towards the earth and followed his lust. So the likeness (famathaluhu) of him is as the likeness (kamathali) of a dog; if thou attackest it it lolls its tongue out, or if thou leavest it, it lolls its tongue out. That is that people's likeness who cried lies to Our signs. So relate the story; haply they will reflect." Surah 7:176

"Now We have sent down to you signs making all clear, and description (wamathalan) of those who passed away before you, and an admonition for the godfearing." Surah 24:34

"Muhammad is the Messenger of God, and those who are with him are hard against the unbelievers, merciful one to another. Thou seest them bowing, prostrating, seeking bounty from God and good pleasure. Their mark is on their faces, the trace of prostration. That is their description (mathaluhum) in the Torah, and their description (wamathaluhum) in the Gospel: as a seed that puts forth its shoot, and strengthens it, and it grows stout and rises straight upon its stalk, pleasing the sowers, that through them He may enrage the unbelievers. God has promised those of them who believe and do deeds of righteousness forgiveness and a mighty wage." Surah 48:29

Allah gives description and states (basharun). Remember what Allah taught us earlier?

"'Why has an angel (malakun) not been sent down on him?' they say; yet had We sent down an angel (malakun), the matter would have been determined, and then no respite would be given them.
And had We made him an angel (malakan), yet assuredly We would have made him a man (rajulan), and confused for them the thing which they themselves are confusing."
Surah 6:8-9

So why would Allah give description the mortal (basharun) who came to her when He used (rijalun) earlier in the example of an angel being sent down? What does Mary (pbuh) tell him when she is told why he is there?

"She said, 'How shall I have a son whom no mortal (basharun) has touched, neither have I been unchaste?'"
Surah 19:20

Allah shows a mortal (basharun) is sent and before Mary conceived the Messiah (pbuh), no mortal (basharun) has touched her.

So why would I believe an angel was sent when Allah's description is crystal clear?
You've already seen the proofs that show how Allah describes conception; it is always with the sperm and ovum. Do you want me to post them here for the sake of completeness?

If He didn't do it in the past with previous Prophets (pbut), He will not change it with any Prophet. Allah says it, and I believe it.

Allah does not change, nor does He change His way (sunnati Allahi): Surah 6:24, 6:115, 10:64, 17:77, 18:27, 30:30, 33:62, 48:15, 48:23, 67:3-4


Or delivered the glad tidings to Abraham, Noah

Mortal men. No where in the Quran does it state angels appeared as men. Allah even says if there were angels as settlers, He would send one as Messenger. But there aren't!

"Say: 'Had there been in the earth angels (mala-ikatun) walking. at peace, We would have sent down upon them out of heaven an angel (malakan) as Messenger.'" Surah 17:95

Even the people of Noah stated no angels were sent down before, so why believe Noah (pbuh)?

"Said the Council of the unbelievers of his people, 'This is naught but a mortal like yourselves, who desires to gain superiority over you. And if God willed, He would have sent down angels (mala-ikatan). We never heard of this among, our fathers, the ancients." Surah 23:24

Allah tells us if an angel were sent down the matter would be decided. Surah 6:8-9, 6:93, 6:158, 11:12, 25:7

Allah sent only Nasi, mortals (beshar), men (rijalun) as Prophets. Surah 3:79-80, 6:130, 12:109, 13:38, 21:29, 22:75

and revealed the Quran to Muhammad. Maybw I misread what you wrote. or did it all occur in a dream? Salam

Allah revealed the Quran to Muhammad (pbuh). The revelation was sent down in the spirit of His command, and laid upon Muhammad's heart.

"Say: 'Whosoever is an enemy to Gabriel -- he it was that brought it down (fa-innahu) upon thy heart by the leave (bi-idh'ni) of God (Allahi), confirming what was before it, and for a guidance and good tidings to the believers."
Surah 2:97

"brought down by the Faithful Spirit" Surah 26:193

"Even so We have revealed to thee a Spirit of Our command. Thou knewest not what the Book was, nor belief; but We made it a light, whereby We guide whom We will of Our servants. And thou, surely thou shalt guide unto a straight path --" Surah 42:52

No where in the Quran does it teach of an angelic man reciting words to Muhammad (pbuh) or any Prophet of Allah (pbut). Allah is very clear on how He reveals to mankind.

"It belongs not to any mortal that God should speak to him, except by revelation, or from behind a veil, or that He should send a Messenger and he reveal whatsoever He will, by His leave; surely He is All-high, All-wise." Surah 42:51

"And when We said to thee, 'Surely thy Lord encompasses men,' and We made the vision that We showed thee and the tree cursed in the Koran to be only a trial for men; and We frighten them, but it only increases them in great insolence." Surah 17:60

"God has indeed fulfilled the vision He vouchsafed to His Messenger truly: 'You shall enter the Holy Mosque, if God wills, in security, your heads shaved, your hair cut short, not fearing.' He knew what you knew not, and appointed ere that a nigh victory." Surah 48:27

The hardest part for us is to give up the preconceptions we bring to our deen, and start over from scratch. Forget everything you used to believe and begin fresh.

Proof: Angels

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pz151Uufthw

You are not stupid, dumb, or incapable of understanding. Trust in Allah. He is Guide.

May Allah increase the believers in knowledge.

Peace.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: AlboDibran on July 16, 2011, 09:16:34 PM
I see what your saying. But question. When it refers the Quran was brought down to his heart. Would you mean in the context he had it in a vision? That Gabriel did not come as an angel to bring it down. that it was to his heart or a vision. Not in the literal sense? I will look into this as it is very interesting. But I just want to fully understand the context your referring to. Also in regards to Abraham, and Lot, when the messengers came to Abraham, and he offered food and they would not take it. then He sought  refuge in Allah and they said fear not we are messengers of God. Was this verse mistranslated? were these "messengers" not angels who came to Abraham? Peace be upon you brother
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Wakas on July 17, 2011, 04:03:40 AM
Quote
Creation of mankind is further discussed in the following verses [3:59, 4:1, 6:2, 6:133, 7:189, 11:61, 15:26, 22:5, 21:30, 23:12, 24:45, 29:19-20, 32:7-8, 37:11, 55:14, 71:14, 76:1, 76:28]. The sequence of events resembles an evolutionary process, but with God as the initiator and sustainer, with mankind being given unique qualities at a point in time when ready.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: raginggaijin on July 17, 2011, 09:58:59 AM
Peace be with you,

I see what your saying. But question. When it refers the Quran was brought down to his heart. Would you mean in the context he had it in a vision? That Gabriel did not come as an angel to bring it down.

Allah is clear: We don't have a lot of knowledge of the spirit (ruh).

"They will question thee concerning the Spirit. Say: 'The Spirit is of the bidding of my Lord. You have been given of knowledge nothing except a little.'" Surah 17:85

You are asking me to create hadith on what happened. I cannot. I only know what Allah has shown us in the Quran. There is plenty of room for people - satans - to create their own teachings, but Allah is clear those are the people who will lead people astray with their teachings based on allegory, not what Allah teaches. Surah 3:7

There are some things we just won't know until the Day of Judgment.

Now I have to ask: Where do you get the idea that Gabriel was a man with wings who came down in a vision and recited the Quran? Part of the process of learning is getting rid of all the past ideas and teachings and starting over. If we don't, we will overlay the ideas we had prior to guidance and try to make them fit. If Allah does not teach it in the Quran, why uphold it?

that it was to his heart or a vision. Not in the literal sense? I will look into this as it is very interesting. But I just want to fully understand the context your referring to. Also in regards to Abraham, and Lot, when the messengers came to Abraham, and he offered food and they would not take it. then He sought  refuge in Allah and they said fear not we are messengers of God. Was this verse mistranslated? were these "messengers" not angels who came to Abraham?

Why would you think they are angels when Allah is clear in the Quran:

Angels are not men (rijalun) nor mortals (basharan) nor are they settlers on this earth. No where in the ayats that speak of the Messengers sent to Abraham and Lot (pbut) that they are (malikan). So why do you believe they are angels?

Allah sent only Nasi, mortals (beshar), men (rijalun):
Surah 3:79-80, 6:130, 12:109, 13:38, 21:29, 22:75

"And We sent Messengers before thee, and We assigned to them wives, and seed; and it was not for any Messengers to bring a sign, but by God's leave. Every term has a Book."
Surah 13:38

Angels bring down the Message in the spirit of Allah's command onto the hearts of the servant's of Allah's choosing. No where in the Quran does it teach angels manifested in any mortal form on earth. Angels are immortal; they do not die.

It is my turn to ask you to bring proof to show why you believe what you believe.
If you cannot provide proof to support it, why do you uphold it? :)

May Allah increase us in knowledge.

Peace.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: SEid on July 17, 2011, 10:23:26 AM
No where in the Quran does it teach angels manifested in any mortal form on earth.

Peace raginggaijin, transformation of the ruh did take place, that is clearly written فَتَمَثَّلَ ...

19:17 so We sent to her رُوحَنَا (our ruh) فَتَمَثَّلَ so he assumed for her the likeness basharan/human straight (i.e. real).

Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Student of Allah on July 17, 2011, 10:48:24 AM
Salam,

Verily I say unto you all, I still do not see the point in your posts reflecting the topic of the thread.


Peace

--------------------------- Student of Allah
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: raginggaijin on July 17, 2011, 11:14:59 AM
Peace raginggaijin, transformation of the ruh did take place, that is clearly written فَتَمَثَّلَ ...

19:17 so We sent to her رُوحَنَا (our ruh) فَتَمَثَّلَ so he assumed for her the likeness basharan/human straight (i.e. real).

Peace and blessings of Allah be with you and yours,

Now a reader runs into problems when the word translated as 'for he assumed for her the likeness' is given for the word (fatamathala). So a phrase is given for a single word, yet throughout the Quran it is not given the same translation, but instead 'likeness', 'description', and 'similitude'. I gave ayats above that show this:

"And had We willed, We would have raised him up thereby; but he inclined towards the earth and followed his lust. So the likeness (famathaluhu) (فَمَثَلُهُ) of him is as the likeness (kamathali)(كَمَثَلِ) of a dog; if thou attackest it it lolls its tongue out, or if thou leavest it, it lolls its tongue out. That is that people's likeness who cried lies to Our signs. So relate the story; haply they will reflect." Surah 7:176

"Now We have sent down to you signs making all clear, and description (wamathalan)(وَمَثَلًا) of those who passed away before you, and an admonition for the godfearing."
Surah 24:34

"Muhammad is the Messenger of God, and those who are with him are hard against the unbelievers, merciful one to another. Thou seest them bowing, prostrating, seeking bounty from God and good pleasure. Their mark is on their faces, the trace of prostration. That is their description (mathaluhum)(مَثَلُهُمْ) in the Torah, and their description (wamathaluhum)(وَمَثَلُهُمْ) in the Gospel: as a seed that puts forth its shoot, and strengthens it, and it grows stout and rises straight upon its stalk, pleasing the sowers, that through them He may enrage the unbelievers. God has promised those of them who believe and do deeds of righteousness forgiveness and a mighty wage." Surah 48:29

This is one of the issues I have with translations, as the translators give a meaning to a word that is used elsewhere in the Quran, but is not translated the same. And in this case, an exposition on the meaning is given.

(fatamathala)(فَتَمَثَّلَ): Surah 19:17
(famathaluhu) (فَمَثَلُهُ): Surah 7:176
(kamathali)(كَمَثَلِ): Surah 7:176
(wamathalan)(وَمَثَلًا): Surah 24:34
(mathaluhum)(مَثَلُهُمْ): Surah 48:29
 (wamathaluhum)(وَمَثَلُهُمْ) Surah 48:29

Yet in none of the ayats outside of Surah 19:17 do they say "they assumed the likeness' or 'they assumed the description' or 'they assumed the similitude'.

So why do they add what Allah did not say to this ayat?

There is no argument the spirit (ruh)(رُوحَنَا), the command of Allah, was sent. Allah is clear about how He sends the spirit (ruh):

"He sends down the angels in the spirit (بِالرُّوحِ) of His command (مِنْ أَمْرِهِ) upon whomsoever He will among His servants, saying: Give you warning that there is no God hut I; so fear you Me!" Surah 16:2

"Exalter of ranks is He, Possessor of the Throne, casting the spirit (الرُّوحَ) of His command (مِنْ أَمْرِهِ) upon whomever He will of His servants, that he may warn them of the Day of Encounter," Surah 40:15

"They will question thee concerning the Spirit. Say: 'The spirit (الرُّوحُ) is of the command (مِنْ أَمْرِ) of my Lord(رَبِّي). You have been given of knowledge nothing except a little.'"
Surah 17:85

For those who say the spirit (ruh) assumed the appearance of a mortal, they run into problems:

The spirit is the command of Allah.
Allah casts His spirit (ruh) into the Prophets (pbut) and the believers.
Are they then not mortals, humans?

"People of the Book, go not beyond the bounds in your religion, and say not as to God but the truth. The Messiah, Isa son of Mary, was only the Messenger of God, and His Word that He committed to Mary, and a spirit from Him (waroohun). So believe in God and His Messengers, and say not, 'Three.' Refrain; better is it for you. God is only One God. Glory be to Him -- That He should have a son! To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and in the earth; God suffices for a guardian." Surah 4:171

"Say: 'The Holy spirit (roohu) sent it down from thy Lord in truth, and to confirm those who believe, and to be a guidance and good tidings to those who surrender.'" Surah 16:102

"And she who guarded her virginity, so We breathed into her of Our spirit (roohina) and appointed her and her son to be a sign unto all beings." Surah 21:91

"then He shaped him, and breathed His spirit (roohihi) in him. And He appointed for you hearing, and sight, and hearts; little thanks you show."
Surah 32:9

"Even so We have revealed to thee a spirit (roohan) of Our command (min amrina). Thou knewest not what the Book was, nor belief; but We made it a light, whereby We guide whom We will of Our servants. And thou, surely thou shalt guide unto a straight path --" Surah 42:52

The spirit is Allah's command. The spirit is cast upon Allah's servants. No where is the spirit a mortal (basharan) human being (insana) or physical manifestation of a man (rijalun).

More to ponder and ask Allah for explanation on.

May Allah increase the believers in knowledge.

Peace.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: raginggaijin on July 17, 2011, 11:28:50 AM
Salam,

Verily I say unto you all, I still do not see the point in your posts reflecting the topic of the thread.
Peace be with you,

The points about the spirit?
The points about how Allah originated creation?
The points about the beliefs of Jinn and Nasi?

They are interlinked.

Allah does not change His way. If He established a way with the Prophets (pbut) before, He will not change it.
So if people believe Adam was created out of literal clay and breathed life into like Pinocchio, then Allah changed His way. Allah is very clear on how humans are made as a result of conception. Surah
If people believe Isa was created by virgin birth, then Allah changed His way. Virgin birth cults have been around in pagan teachings since Isis and Horus in Egypt.
If people believe Jinn are fire creatures who live on the earth, then Allah changed His way. Allah only sent humans, mortals, Nasi as Messengers, and He states angels are not settlers in the earth or He would have sent an angel as a Messenger for them.

I'm unclear as to where the confusion comes in. :P

Peace.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: SEid on July 17, 2011, 12:25:18 PM
Peace raginggaijin,

Now a reader runs into problems when the word translated as 'for he assumed for her the likeness' is given for the word (fatamathala). So a phrase is given for a single word, yet throughout the Quran it is not given the same translation, but instead 'likeness', 'description', and 'similitude'.

OK then 19:17 so We sent to her رُوحَنَا (our ruh) فَتَمَثَّلَ so likeness/appearance for her basharan/human straight (i.e. real).

It?s clear the ruh appeared to her as a real person, so what is the issue?

For those who say the spirit (ruh) assumed the appearance of a mortal, they run into problems:

The spirit is the command of Allah.
Allah casts His spirit (ruh) into the Prophets (pbut) and the believers.
Are they then not mortals, humans?

There are no problems, simply add 19:17 to what we know about the ruh ? sent ?appears? as a person.

Allah does not change His way.

That's an assumption on the complete understanding of all the physics involved and the way of Allah.


Verily I say unto you all, I still do not see the point in your posts reflecting the topic of the thread.


OK back to topic, I believe in devolution of the original code program of life over time which initself has error correcting and adapting code. Thus nothing new is created which wasn't a part of the original and it's only some parts of the code that are applified or turned on whereas other parts of the code are inactive/dormant or destroyed by radiaction, etc. No such thing as evolution, programs don't re-write themselves as version 2.0 unless extremely advanced adaptable to begin with and the idea of precise machinery evolving over time healing itself as in DNA replication even if given billions of years absurd.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jtmOZaIvS0






Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: AlboDibran on July 17, 2011, 02:32:22 PM

It is my turn to ask you to bring proof to show why you believe what you believe.
If you cannot provide proof to support it, why do you uphold it? :)

May Allah increase us in knowledge.

Peace.

Well brother I wasnt debating you lol. Merely asking a question. Personally I have not dont extensive look into angels so I could not say. Of course to my present mindset, I dont like to say sternly that its like this or like that. As I have not researched it. I wasnt there when these matters took place to know exactly how they unfolded. I do however believe they took place. But what you present is interesting none the less. So I will do my research and let you know what I come across. If God wills to show me.

Peace be unto you
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: raginggaijin on July 17, 2011, 06:33:01 PM
Well brother I wasnt debating you lol. Merely asking a question.

Peace be with you,

Don't take every return question as a debate, especially with me, please! I hate how text doesn't convey tone, and with many who want info in 'tweets' or neat little sound bites, it gets difficult to convey a point without sounding blunt or terse. I prefer talking face-to-face or using dialogues to convey my beliefs.

Personally I have not dont extensive look into angels so I could not say. Of course to my present mindset, I dont like to say sternly that its like this or like that. As I have not researched it. I wasnt there when these matters took place to know exactly how they unfolded. I do however believe they took place. But what you present is interesting none the less. So I will do my research and let you know what I come across. If God wills to show me.

And that is what we are all supposed to do; a person comes up with something and says 'I believe in this and that!' We are then obligated to look into it and ask Allah to explain it to us, before we make up our minds. :D

You are on the right track, and your heart is in the right place.

Do you want to serve Allah?
Then do good deeds. :)

That's the bottom line.

We may not agree on everything, but we should be striving in service to Him.

May Allah guide us to a right better than this.

Peace and blessings.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Student of Allah on July 17, 2011, 11:14:47 PM
Peace be with you,

The points about the spirit?
The points about how Allah originated creation?
The points about the beliefs of Jinn and Nasi?

They are interlinked.

Allah does not change His way. If He established a way with the Prophets (pbut) before, He will not change it.
So if people believe Adam was created out of literal clay and breathed life into like Pinocchio, then Allah changed His way. Allah is very clear on how humans are made as a result of conception. Surah
If people believe Isa was created by virgin birth, then Allah changed His way. Virgin birth cults have been around in pagan teachings since Isis and Horus in Egypt.
If people believe Jinn are fire creatures who live on the earth, then Allah changed His way. Allah only sent humans, mortals, Nasi as Messengers, and He states angels are not settlers in the earth or He would have sent an angel as a Messenger for them.

I'm unclear as to where the confusion comes in. :P

Peace.

Salam,

But the topic is about the Evolution of Species, the theory that was originally proposed by Charles Darwin. Theory of Evolution. Everything in this world can be interlinked to one another, afterall , it is a closed system. Why are you guyz debating over a completely foreign aspect in this thread ? To me, it makes no sense what so ever, and I beleve the posts must be transported to some place they really belong.


PEACE
----------------------- Student of Allah
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: AlboDibran on July 17, 2011, 11:42:22 PM
Actually Darwin borrowed and expanded on the theory of evolution. It was first taught and advocated by a Muslim scientists  during the golden age of Islam. I believe his name was Ibn Khaldoun. And Allah knows best how life was made. personally I find it arrogant that people equate evolution to disbelief. I dont believe in evolution from frog to money to human. But a guided proccess of selection makes sense. And If Allah created evolution, than evolution does not disprove Allah, nor does upholding the idea od some form of evolutionary selection make one a non believer. The reason evolutionary theory is still presenting issues, is because the complex system of cells and organisms within evolutionary chains is so complex that It couldnt possibly take place without an intelligent creator guiding the process. In the end Allah knows best. Peace be upon you all
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Student of Allah on July 17, 2011, 11:48:38 PM
Actually Darwin borrowed and expanded on the theory of evolution. It was first taught and advocated by a Muslim scientists  during the golden age of Islam. I believe his name was Ibn Khaldoun. And Allah knows best how life was made. personally I find it arrogant that people equate evolution to disbelief. I dont believe in evolution from frog to money to human. But a guided proccess of selection makes sense. And If Allah created evolution, than evolution does not disprove Allah, nor does upholding the idea od some form of evolutionary selection make one a non believer. The reason evolutionary theory is still presenting issues, is because the complex system of cells and organisms within evolutionary chains is so complex that It couldnt possibly take place without an intelligent creator guiding the process. In the end Allah knows best. Peace be upon you all

Salam,

The problem with evolution and muslims are purely cultural and emotional. Evoution is attacked by the christians, nothing unexpected as most of them believe that the earth is around 6000years old or at most 10000 years old. For me, evolution is good to go. Like any scientific theory, the model will improve with time. And I remember someone in this forum, telling me about this muslim back in the 12/13th century i think that discussed such theories. Dont remember the name.


PEACE
-------------------- Student of Allah
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: raginggaijin on July 18, 2011, 12:12:14 AM
Salam,

But the topic is about the Evolution of Species, the theory that was originally proposed by Charles Darwin. Theory of Evolution. Everything in this world can be interlinked to one another, afterall , it is a closed system. Why are you guyz debating over a completely foreign aspect in this thread ? To me, it makes no sense what so ever, and I beleve the posts must be transported to some place they really belong.


PEACE
----------------------- Student of Allah

Peace and blessings of Allah be upon you,

I dig it. I'll stop responding to this thread so discussion can continue. I apologize for the derailing.  :-[

Peace and blessings.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: kgwithnob on July 18, 2011, 07:56:09 AM
...But the topic is about the Evolution of Species, the theory that was originally proposed by Charles Darwin. Theory of Evolution. Everything in this world can be interlinked to one another, afterall , it is a closed system...
All highlights are from me.

http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9602536.msg280134#msg280134

Quote
...Why are you guyz debating over a completely foreign aspect in this thread ? To me, it makes no sense what so ever, and I beleve the posts must be transported to some place they really belong...

I agree with you completely. Someone derailed the topic, and I think he did it on purpose. I hope I am wrong. God knows best.

Peace,
Khalil
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: AlboDibran on July 18, 2011, 08:58:45 AM
While I do not believe POOF we were here. What is your claim that Adam didnt exist? That Adam was not in the Garden, that he didnt eat of the tree. that he wasnt banished to earth. from "wherever" he was. Dont get me wrong not challenging it. Just want it explained. It is a bold claim considering Quran does mention the garden and banihsment. Peace be upon you
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Student of Allah on July 18, 2011, 10:41:12 AM
While I do not believe POOF we were here. What is your claim that Adam didnt exist? That Adam was not in the Garden, that he didnt eat of the tree. that he wasnt banished to earth. from "wherever" he was. Dont get me wrong not challenging it. Just want it explained. It is a bold claim considering Quran does mention the garden and banihsment. Peace be upon you

Salam,

Inshallah, explanation coming soon :D

PEACE

--------------------- Student of Allah
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: AlboDibran on July 18, 2011, 10:50:08 AM
Lol Inshallah. Salam
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: kgwithnob on July 18, 2011, 02:01:39 PM
While I do not believe POOF we were here. What is your claim that Adam didnt exist? That Adam was not in the Garden, that he didnt eat of the tree. that he wasnt banished to earth. from "wherever" he was. Dont get me wrong not challenging it. Just want it explained. It is a bold claim considering Quran does mention the garden and banihsment. Peace be upon you
Highlight above is from me.

According to The Qur?aan, Adam is not the first human. Adam and his people, i.e. other humans of his time were already living in the ?GARDEN?, i.e. in the trees, somewhere here on Earth, and I personally believe, the place was in east Africa, and probably at the slopes of Kilimanjaro, or somewhere like that. I am saying that, because, all evidences resulting from natural science, point to modern man, originated in east Africa.

Now lets contemplate verses of The Qur?aan and see What GOD Almighty is telling us regarding the issue.

1st: GOD?S commandment regarding how we should study His creation. See verse 29:20 below.

 قُلۡ سِيرُواْ فِى ٱلۡأَرۡضِ فَٱنظُرُواْ ڪَيۡفَ بَدَأَ ٱلۡخَلۡقَۚ ثُمَّ ٱللَّهُ يُنشِئُ ٱلنَّشۡأَةَ ٱلۡأَخِرَةَۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ عَلَىٰ ڪُلِّ شَىۡءٍ۬ قَدِيرٌ۬
??Roam the Earth and observe how God started the creation??

Here, it is absolutely necessary to explore the Earth to learn how GOD started the creation.

2nd: In verse 2:30 GOD informs the angels He is APPOINTING, NOT creating, a SUCCESSOR within the Earth, NOT anywhere else in the Universe.
وَإِذۡ قَالَ رَبُّكَ لِلۡمَلَـٰٓٮِٕكَةِ إِنِّى جَاعِلٌ۬ فِى ٱلۡأَرۡضِ خَلِيفَةً۬ۖ قَالُوٓاْ أَتَجۡعَلُ فِيہَا مَن يُفۡسِدُ فِيہَا وَيَسۡفِكُ ٱلدِّمَآءَ وَنَحۡنُ نُسَبِّحُ بِحَمۡدِكَ وَنُقَدِّسُ لَكَۖ قَالَ إِنِّىٓ أَعۡلَمُ مَا لَا تَعۡلَمُونَ
The angels did not expect this event and questioned GOD?S decision on that, wondering why He is placing a NEW, corrupt and blood shedding creature within the Earth. One must ask why the angels asked such a question. Do they know the future events? Surly NOT! No one knows about the future but GOD, SWT, Himself. Here in fact, the angels are remembering the past, the previous generations of humans, and their behavior and that, this one wouldn?t be any different either.

Next. GOD informs them of their ignorance and challenges them on that regard. The angels confess accordingly and glorify GOD.

3rd: After Adam, his wife, and the others that were living in the same habitat, ate from the forbidden tree and lost their outer protective garments, they became vulnerable against the elements and started suffering.

4th: Consequently, they all had to get down the trees and the high elevations and migrate to lower land and warmer climates in order to suffer less and to survive. See verse 2:30 through 2:38 for clarification.

CONCLUSION:
?   Adam was not created instantly, he was the EVOLUTIONARY successor of his previous generations.
?   Adam was not EXILED to EARTH from some other place in the Universe.

Peace,
Khalil

 



Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: The Dreamer on July 18, 2011, 02:14:37 PM
Proof: GOD
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzcVu-CpzXQ

Proof: Jinn
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwjC7dEMkDU

Proof: Birds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyEpjv2nAho

Feel free to uphold teachings of the ancients of evil spirits and boogeymen.
The Quran does not uphold the teachings of the ancients, so I cannot believe as you believe.
I believe Jinn are the race of humans that preceded Nasi.

Peace.

"And when it is said to them: 'What is it that your Lord has sent down?' They say: 'tales of the ancients!'" (16:24)

I like your intimidation tactics. When your view of the Qur'an (largely based on speculation) is threatened you get very defensive. Can you explain those verses?
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: raginggaijin on July 18, 2011, 05:57:57 PM
"And when it is said to them: 'What is it that your Lord has sent down?' They say: 'tales of the ancients!'" (16:24)

I like your intimidation tactics. When your view of the Qur'an (largely based on speculation) is threatened you get very defensive. Can you explain those verses?


You fear man so much you are intimidated when your own beliefs are questioned?
If you believe you are on the proper path, there is no fear or doubt as you have confirmed (saddaqat) the Truth and have proof for why you believe what you believe. You are not relying on the explanation of man to guide you.

I don't think you understand: I don't care what you believe. I am only responsible for myself; what I do, what I say, and what I believe.

Go back and read what is posted in this thread and confirm if it is true or false. That's your responsibility, no one else can do that for you.

As stated, I cannot believe in the fairy tales of Judaism and Christianity, when they are clearly proven false in the Quran. Proof is given above. That is not 'getting defensive'. That is proving proof, as we are commanded to do in the Quran.

Bring your proof: Surah 2:111, 6:57, 8:42, 14:10, 21:24, 27:64, 28:75, 52:38

You are free to pick apart my terminology, ignoring the warning in the Quran of following teachings of those who inherited the Books:

"And We have sent down to thee the Book with the truth, confirming the Book that was before it, and assuring it. So judge between them according to what God has sent down, and do not follow their caprices, to forsake the truth that has come to thee. To every one of you We have appointed a right way and an open road. If God had willed, He would have made you one nation; but that He may try you in what has come to you. So be you forward in good works; unto God shall you return, all together; and He will tell you of that whereon you were at variance.
And judge between them according to what God has sent down, and do not follow their caprices, and beware of them lest they tempt thee away from any of what God has sent down to thee. But if they turn their backs, know that God desires only to smite them for some sin they have committed; surely, many men are ungodly.
Is it the judgment of pagandom then that they are seeking? Yet who is fairer in judgment than God, for a people having sure faith?"
Surah 5:48-50

The disbelievers call them fairy-tales because they do not understand the revelation; they uphold superstition and teachings of man instead of asking Allah to guide and explain.

"Hast thou not regarded those who were given a share of the Book believing in demons (aljibti) and false gods, and saying to the unbelievers, 'These are more rightly guided on the way than the believers'?" Surah 4:51

If you believe I am wrong or misguided, then you should not feel intimidated. You should be able to bring proof from the Quran that refutes what I believe and dismiss me as ignorant.

Ask yourself why you feel intimidated, then choose accordingly. :)

Peace.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: raginggaijin on July 18, 2011, 06:11:26 PM

I agree with you completely. Someone derailed the topic, and I think he did it on purpose. I hope I am wrong. God knows best.

Peace,
Khalil

Bring proof or keep silent, it's wiser.

"O believers, eschew much suspicion; some suspicion is a sin. And do not spy, neither backbite one another; would any of you like to eat the flesh of his brother dead? You would abominate it. And fear you God; assuredly God turns, and He is All-compassionate." Surah 49:12

I seek refuge in Allah from being among the ignorant. Surah 2:67

Peace.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Abdul-Hadi on July 18, 2011, 10:13:11 PM
Salam,

Verily I say unto you all, I still do not see the point in your posts reflecting the topic of the thread.


Peace

--------------------------- Student of Allah

LOL, true.

THREADJACK!

 :peace:
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: The Dreamer on July 19, 2011, 11:09:21 PM
You fear man

And where did I imply this?  ::)

so much you are intimidated when your own beliefs are questioned?

I never said I was intimidated. I said that you appear to use intimidation tactics - immediately jumping to the conclusion that I believe in tales of the ancients. And for what reason? I did not write anything! I did not state anything! All I quoted was the Qur'an but your reply was "Feel free to uphold teachings of the ancients of evil spirits and boogeymen."

If you believe I am wrong or misguided, then you should not feel intimidated.

Again, I do not feel intimidated. I feel that you use intimidation tactics.

You should be able to bring proof from the Quran that refutes what I believe and dismiss me as ignorant.

First off, I will not "dismiss" anyone as ignorant simply because they make a few errors in their understanding of the Qur'an. If they dismiss my evidence however...  :laugh:

Second, I have brought my proof which you've failed to respond to. Please look at these verses:

"And the Jinn race, We had created before, from the fire of a scorching wind." (15:27)

"And He created Jinns from fire free of smoke" (55:15)

Jinn and men are of entirely different essence.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: The Dreamer on July 19, 2011, 11:14:38 PM
LOL, true.

THREADJACK!

 :peace:

(http://i55.tinypic.com/r0ovlv.jpg)

 :laugh:
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: raginggaijin on July 20, 2011, 01:07:37 AM
And where did I imply this?  ::)

'Intimidation tactics'. People who are not fearful are not intimidated.

I never said I was intimidated. I said that you appear to use intimidation tactics - immediately jumping to the conclusion that I believe in tales of the ancients. And for what reason? I did not write anything! I did not state anything! All I quoted was the Qur'an but your reply was "Feel free to uphold teachings of the ancients of evil spirits and boogeymen."

Because your question was answered in my previous post. But I'll bite.

You believe Jinn are of a different 'essence'? Then what is this 'essence' if it is not aetherial - spirit? Are you saying they are 'Reptiliads' or 'Greys' or some-such being? What is this 'essence'? Speak clearly and bring proof from the Quran to support why you believe this.

If you uphold they are not part of human kind, then you run into a problem. Allah includes Jinn as part of the Nasi in Surah 114:5-6.

"who whispers in the breasts of Nasi, of Jinn and Nasi.'" Surah 114:5-6
"Allathee yuwaswisu fee sudoori alnnasi Mina aljinnati waalnnasi" Surah 114:5-6

Jinn are Christians who accepted the Quran: Surah 72:1-18
Jinn are Yahudians who accepted the Quran: Surah 46:29-30
Solomon?s Jinn in Quran: Surah 27:16-41, 34:12-13
Solomon's Jinn in previous Books: I Kings 5:13-17, II Chron. 2:17-18, II Chron. 4:4-6

Who were the people before the Nasi? Bring proof from the Quran to show why you believe what you believe.

Again, I do not feel intimidated. I feel that you use intimidation tactics.

And what am I going to do? Caps-lock you? :P
If you do not believe you are misguided, then why would what I believe about you or say about you matter? You will not be called to account to me. You should be more concerned with what Allah knows about you, as you will be called to account with Him and Him alone.

First off, I will not "dismiss" anyone as ignorant simply because they make a few errors in their understanding of the Qur'an. If they dismiss my evidence however...  :laugh:

When an answer to your question is posted before you even asked it, and you refuse to read it before you respond, I will dismiss you as ignorant. You didn't even read what was shown, you just posted ayats that were quoted and responded to before you asked your question.

You didn't study the material presented.

ig?no?rant
1. lacking in knowledge or training; unlearned: an ignorant man.
2. lacking knowledge or information as to a particular subject or fact: ignorant of quantum physics.
3. uninformed; unaware.

Second, I have brought my proof which you've failed to respond to.

Because the answer is in the post preceding your 'proof', preemptively answering your question. It's not my problem nor my responsibility if you refuse to read.

Please look at these verses:

"And the Jinn race, We had created before, from the fire of a scorching wind." (15:27)

"And He created Jinns from fire free of smoke" (55:15)

Jinn and men are of entirely different essence.

I'm bolding, underlining, and italicizing in your quote what you failed to see.

Here is a repost of the material previously presented, should you so choose to read it this time:

The Jinn were created before the Nasi. You admitted this in your response on the other thread.

I also want you to note you are using the Arabic word for 'Jinn', but you translate (Nasi) into 'Man'. So already a deception is occurring. But we'll get to that.

Jinn were created before Nasi, which shows Nasi are successors of the Jinn. This is upheld in the Quran.

Successor (Khalif): Surah 2:30, 3:170, 4:9, 6:133, 6:165, 7:17, 7:69, 7:74, 7:142, 7:150, 7:169, 9:118, 10:14, 10:73, 10:92, 13:11, 19:59, 21:28, 22:76, 27:62, 34:9, 35:39, 36:9, 36:45, 38:26, 41:14, 41:25, 41:42, 43:60, 46:21, 67:15, 72:27
?And when thy Lord said to the angels, 'I am setting in the earth a successor (khaleefatan).' They said, 'What, wilt Thou set therein one who will do corruption there, and shed blood, while We proclaim Thy praise and call Thee Holy?' He said, 'Assuredly I know that you know not.'? Surah 2:30

"What, do you wonder that a reminder from your Lord should come to you by the lips of a man from among you? That he may warn you; and remember when He appointed you as successors (khulafaa) after the people of Noah, and increased you in stature broadly; remember God's bounties; haply you will prosper.'" Surah 7:69

"And there succeeded (Fakhalafa) after them a succession (khalfun) who inherited the Book, taking the chance goods of this lower world, and saying, 'It will be forgiven us'; and if chance goods the like of them come to them, they will take them. Has not the compact of the Book been taken touching them, that they should say concerning God nothing but the truth? And they have studied what is in it; and the Last Abode is better for those who are godfearing. Do you not understand?" Surah 7:169

"And to the three who were left behind (khullifoo), until, when the earth became strait for them, for all its breadth, and their souls became strait for them, and they thought that there was no shelter from God except in Him, then He turned towards them, that they might also turn; surely God turns, and is All-compassionate." Surah 9:118

"Had We willed, We would have made angels among you successors (yakhlufoona) in the earth." Surah 43:60

Allah states clearly Nasi are made from the seed of another people.

"Thy Lord is All-sufficient, Merciful. If He will, He can put you away, and leave after you, to succeed you (wayastakhlif), what He will, as He produced you from the seed (dhurriyyati) of another (ākharīna) people (qawmin)." Surah 6:133

He even gives details how Adam (pbuh) was made.

?He is the Knower of the Unseen and the Visible, the All-mighty, the All-compassionate, Who has created all things well. And He originated the creation of humans (al-insani) of clay (min teenin), then He fashioned his descendant (naslahu) of an extraction (sulalatin) of low (maheenin) water (ma-in), then He shaped (sawwahu) him, and breathed His spirit (roohihi) in him. And He appointed for you hearing, and sight, and hearts; little thanks you show.?
Surah 32:6-9

There is only one Nasi spoken of in the Quran who was shaped and had Allah's ruh breathed into him - Adam (pbuh): Surah 15:29, 32:9, 38:72

If all human beings sprung from the joining of one couple, Allah would not make distinction between the bloodline of the Prophets (pbut), as we all would be from the seed of Adam (pbuh).

(dhurriyyatī) offspring: Surah 2:124, 2:128, 2:266, 3:34, 3:36, 3:38, 4:9, 6:84, 6:87, 6:133, 7:172, 7:173, 10:83, 13:38, 14:37, 14:40, 17:3, 17:62, 18:50, 19:58, 29:27, 36:41, 37:77, 37:113, 46:15, 52:21, 57:26
Seed of Adam: Surah 3:33, 6:83-87, 7:172, 17:2-3, 19:58. 57:26

?We have honoured the Children of Adam and carried them on land and sea, and provided them with good things, and preferred them greatly over many of those We created.? Surah 17:70

"That is Our argument, which We bestowed upon Abraham as against his people. We raise up in degrees whom We will; surely thy Lord is All-wise, All-knowing.
And We gave to him Isaac and Jacob -- each one We guided, And Noah We guided before; and of his seed (dhurriyyatihi) David and Solomon, Job and Joseph, Moses and Aaron -- even so We recompense the good-doers -- Zachariah and John, Isa and Elias; each was of the righteous; Ishmael and Elisha, Jonah and Lot - each one We preferred above all beings; and of their fathers, and of their seed (wadhurriyyātihim), and of their brethren (wa-ikh'wānihim); and We elected them, and We guided them to a straight path."
Surah 6:83-87

"And We gave Moses the Book, and made it a guidance to the Children of Israel: 'Take not unto yourselves any guardian apart from Me.' The seed (dhurriyyata) of those We bore with Noah; he was a thankful servant." Surah 17:2-3

"These are they whom God has blessed among the Prophets of the seed (dhurriyyati) of Adam, and of those We bore with Noah, and of the seed (dhurriyyati) of Abraham and Israel, and of those We guided and chose. When the signs of the All-merciful were recited to them, they fell down prostrate, weeping." Surah 19:58

"And We sent Noah, and Abraham, and We appointed the Prophecy and the Book to be among their seed (dhurriyyatihimā); and some of them are guided, and many of them are ungodly." Surah 57:26

The Jinn are human beings.

Jinn are Christians ? Byzantines ? who accepted the Quran: Surah 72:1-18
Jinn are Yahudians ? Persians ? who accepted the Quran: Surah 46:29-30
Jew and Christian polytheists who lead astray: Surah 2:105, 2:120, 2:135, 2:140, 3:67, 3:95, 3:151, 3:186, 5:82, 6:106, 6:137, 6:161, 9:31-33, 10:105, 16:120, 22:17, 98:1-6

Jinn are foreigners among Nasi: Surah 6:128-131, 22:17, 34:12-13, 7:38, 7:179
'Ajam' ? ?Non-Arab? or ?Persian?: Surah 16:103, 41:44, 26:198
Roman-Persian wars: Surah 30:2-4, 105:1-5
Solomon?s Jinn in Quran: Surah 27:16-41, 34:12-13
Solomon's Jinn in previous Books: I Kings 5:13-17, II Chron. 2:17-18, II Chron. 4:4-6

But, but, but... They are made of SMOKELESS FIRE!!!!!!!111111111oneoneoneoneleventeen. (They are of another essence!)

The same people who uphold these superstitious beliefs are often among the many who point to the scientific miracles in the Quran.

One such miracle is Surah 21:30:

"Have not the unbelievers then beheld that the heavens and the earth were a mass all sewn up, and then We unstitched them and of water fashioned every living thing? Will they not believe?" Surah 21:30

This is from the Arberry Quran, translated in 1950. The Yusuf Ali Quran, translated in the 1920s reads:

"Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" Surah 21:30

In 1978, the Nobel Prize was awarded for the theory of the Big Bang. This theory postulates that the universe was one mass - a monoblock - that was blown apart and sent out into the void.

Press release for 1978 Nobel Peace Prize:
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1978/press.html

"A theory developed by the American physicist Gamow and his associates suggested that this synthesis took place at the beginning of the existence of the universe. It is known from studies of the spectra of stars and galaxies that the universe is at present expanding uniformly. This means that at a certain point, 15 billion years ago, the universe was very compact; it is thus tempting to assume that the universe was created by a cosmic explosion, or 'big bang', although other explanations are possible. This 'big bang' theory implies the occurrence of very high temperatures, of about 10 billion degrees. Only at those temperatures can various nuclear reactions take place such that chemical elements could be built up from the elementary particles assumed to be present from the very beginning."

Here Scientists - the largest group of unbelievers I know of who cannot believe in something without proof - are showing how the components of all life and matter in the universe was created in this one Big Bang of intense heat and expansion.

Let's repeat that: "This 'big bang' theory implies the occurrence of very high temperatures, of about 10 billion degrees."
This 'big bang' theory implies the occurrence of very high temperatures, of about 10 billion degrees.
This 'big bang' theory implies the occurrence of very high temperatures, of about 10 billion degrees.

(Note: I even put this in large letters in my previous post, and still you responded with your 'essence' post.)

Jinn created before Nasi of a released, scorching fire:  Surah 15:27, 55:15
?And He created (Wakhalaqa) the jinn of (aljanna min) release (marijin) of fire (min narin).? Surah 55:15
?and the jinn created We before of fire scorching (alssamoomi).? Surah 15:27

While someone who upholds superstition sees evil fire creatures lurking in the aether, I see the intense heat of the Big Bang creating the components of all life itself.

You would think, if the Quran still speaks of the Jinn, there would be some way to know them from the Nasi. After all, Allah makes it clear in Surah 114:5-6 that the Jinn are part of the Nasi:

"Allathee yuwaswisu fee sudoori alnnasi Mina aljinnati waalnnasi" 114:5-6
"who whispers in the breasts of nasi, of jinn and nasi.'" Surah 114:5-6

If we are ALL Nasi, but there are still Jinn in and among the Nasi, there must be some indication of these Jinn that still remains if they are humans, right? If the Quran says it, then we should find some indication of it.

Neanderthal DNA still found in modern Homo Sapiens:

Neanderthals, Humans Interbred?First Solid DNA Evidence:
"The next time you're tempted to call some oaf a Neanderthal, you might want to take a look in the mirror.
According to a new DNA study, most humans have a little Neanderthal in them?at least 1 to 4 percent of a person's genetic makeup.
The study uncovered the first solid genetic evidence that "modern" humans?or Homo sapiens?interbred with their Neanderthal neighbors, who mysteriously died out about 30,000 years ago.
What's more, the Neanderthal-modern human mating apparently took place in the Middle East, shortly after modern humans had left Africa, not in Europe?as has long been suspected."

Read more: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/05/100506-science-neanderthals-humans-mated-interbred-dna-gene/

Study: Neanderthal DNA Lives On in Modern Humans

"Still, other paleoanthropologists say the discovery is not entirely unexpected. There is ample archaeological evidence ? including tools, habitation sites and fossils ? that Neanderthals and early modern humans may have coexisted in the Middle East as much as 80,000 years ago, and certainly in Europe 30,000 to 45,000 years ago. What has been missing until now is the genetic evidence.

"The fact that they found it across the board says that the evidence must be very widespread across modern humans," says Erik Trinkaus, an anthropologist at Washington University in St. Louis, Mo., who has long argued that the human fossils he has studied in France, Romania, the Czech Republic and other places show mixed ancestry. "If you can find evidence [of Neanderthals] after 30,000 years of [human] genetic shifting, then it must have been pretty important or prominent then." Trinkaus speculates that the genetic flow between Neanderthals and early modern humans might have been as high as 10% to 20%.
The new finding may prompt a tweaking of the well-known Out of Africa theory, which in its strictest interpretation says a small group of early modern humans left Africa and outcompeted and replaced all other hominids without any interbreeding. The alternate theory, known as multiregionalism, argues that distinct populations of modern humans developed simultaneously around the world and along the same evolutionary lines by swapping genes.
"What we falsify here is the very hard Out of Africa theory," said P??bo. "We show that outside Africa there is this 1% to 4% that came from archaic humans. Of course, it's totally possible that archaic forms that we don't know contributed to Africans today. I don't think we should take this as evidence that only people outside Africa have some 'caveman' biology within them."
According to Trinkaus, many paleoanthropologists have long believed that early modern humans and Neanderthals interbred. "People have been saying this for decades," he argues. "The minority position was the position that there was no gene flow. Most people who work with the fossil record support some level of admixture."

Whatever our mixing, it is human uniqueness that has also been revealed by the sequencing. By comparing the Neanderthal genome with those of modern humans, the team identified a small number of genetic changes that were newly evolved in modern humans. Some of the changes may have arisen as a result of genetic drift, but others seem to have been positively selected for ? meaning they swept through populations rapidly, possibly because they gave us some advantage."

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1987568-2,00.html

So we do find remnants of the Jinn - Neanderthal man - who was created before Homo Sapien man. We find this in the DNA of Homo Sapien - the Nasi.

So again, while you see different 'essences', I see the intense heat of the Big Bang creating the components of all life itself. All according to Allah's will.

"He said, 'Our Lord is He who gave everything its creation, then guided it.'"
Surah 20:50

So, after reading this, do you still not understand what I believe? If so, let me know.

If you do understand, then please bring proof to show why you believe what you believe. I look forward to reading it.

Had you read the post that preceded your question, you would not see my response as a tactic of 'intimidation' and instead the dismissal of one who refuses to pay attention. ;)

Bring your proof.

Peace.

Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Student of Allah on July 20, 2011, 05:41:50 AM
Salam,

One of my pass time activity is to think of annoying robots. Recently, one of my cousin joined me in the thinking process to design various types of robots or automatons that would annoy people. One of our "thought project" is this pair of robots that fight each other with fancy martial arts and keep on seeking each other to fight. We were thinking about programming them to actually fix themselves or each other if it so happens that one of them suffers deadly battle damage. Just after they fix the damaged opponent, they immediately start fighting each other till one or both of them is destroyed. And the cycle goes on and on.

Why am I sharing this ??? Well, it is because I found my models in this thread. To write the programs for the robots, all I need is study some people from this thread.

Can I apologize on behalf of anyone that started the thread-jacking and take all the blame on myself and ask a moderator to delete my post for the thread-jacking of others ? We can actually make it more fun than this debate that is going on. You all can put all your blames on me. We will ask a moderator to keep on deleting my posts across the website. Then the administrator will order the deactivation of my account which will somehow re-activate 3days and 3 nights later ??? What do you say ? Wont that be off-topic enough ??

PEACE
-------------------------------------- Student of Allah
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: raginggaijin on July 20, 2011, 11:38:41 AM
Salam,

Why am I sharing this ??? Well, it is because I found my models in this thread. To write the programs for the robots, all I need is study some people from this thread.

PEACE
-------------------------------------- Student of Allah

I'm not following why you believe this discussion on Jinn is 'thread-jacking'?

People say Jinn are spirits, and I believe they are the ancestors that preceded the Nasi. I have given proof to show why I believe this.
If the Nasi are part of evolution, who were the people who they succeeded?

Totally on topic, if people would read what is given.
Makes me wonder why people are totally oblivious to what is shown. Like they can't see it. :)

Regardless, I have given proof to show why I believe in Intervention and Intelligent Design: Allah guided the creation.
People are welcome to believe in whatever they desire.

Peace.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: The Dreamer on July 20, 2011, 12:04:38 PM
'Intimidation tactics'. People who are not fearful are not intimidated.

Because your question was answered in my previous post. But I'll bite.

You believe Jinn are of a different 'essence'? Then what is this 'essence' if it is not aetherial - spirit? Are you saying they are 'Reptiliads' or 'Greys' or some-such being? What is this 'essence'? Speak clearly and bring proof from the Quran to support why you believe this.

If you uphold they are not part of human kind, then you run into a problem. Allah includes Jinn as part of the Nasi in Surah 114:5-6.

"who whispers in the breasts of Nasi, of Jinn and Nasi.'" Surah 114:5-6
"Allathee yuwaswisu fee sudoori alnnasi Mina aljinnati waalnnasi" Surah 114:5-6

Jinn are Christians who accepted the Quran: Surah 72:1-18
Jinn are Yahudians who accepted the Quran: Surah 46:29-30
Solomon?s Jinn in Quran: Surah 27:16-41, 34:12-13
Solomon's Jinn in previous Books: I Kings 5:13-17, II Chron. 2:17-18, II Chron. 4:4-6

Who were the people before the Nasi? Bring proof from the Quran to show why you believe what you believe.

And what am I going to do? Caps-lock you? :P
If you do not believe you are misguided, then why would what I believe about you or say about you matter? You will not be called to account to me. You should be more concerned with what Allah knows about you, as you will be called to account with Him and Him alone.

When an answer to your question is posted before you even asked it, and you refuse to read it before you respond, I will dismiss you as ignorant. You didn't even read what was shown, you just posted ayats that were quoted and responded to before you asked your question.

You didn't study the material presented.

ig?no?rant
1. lacking in knowledge or training; unlearned: an ignorant man.
2. lacking knowledge or information as to a particular subject or fact: ignorant of quantum physics.
3. uninformed; unaware.

Because the answer is in the post preceding your 'proof', preemptively answering your question. It's not my problem nor my responsibility if you refuse to read.

I'm bolding, underlining, and italicizing in your quote what you failed to see.

Here is a repost of the material previously presented, should you so choose to read it this time:

The Jinn were created before the Nasi. You admitted this in your response on the other thread.

I also want you to note you are using the Arabic word for 'Jinn', but you translate (Nasi) into 'Man'. So already a deception is occurring. But we'll get to that.

Jinn were created before Nasi, which shows Nasi are successors of the Jinn. This is upheld in the Quran.

Successor (Khalif): Surah 2:30, 3:170, 4:9, 6:133, 6:165, 7:17, 7:69, 7:74, 7:142, 7:150, 7:169, 9:118, 10:14, 10:73, 10:92, 13:11, 19:59, 21:28, 22:76, 27:62, 34:9, 35:39, 36:9, 36:45, 38:26, 41:14, 41:25, 41:42, 43:60, 46:21, 67:15, 72:27
?And when thy Lord said to the angels, 'I am setting in the earth a successor (khaleefatan).' They said, 'What, wilt Thou set therein one who will do corruption there, and shed blood, while We proclaim Thy praise and call Thee Holy?' He said, 'Assuredly I know that you know not.'? Surah 2:30

"What, do you wonder that a reminder from your Lord should come to you by the lips of a man from among you? That he may warn you; and remember when He appointed you as successors (khulafaa) after the people of Noah, and increased you in stature broadly; remember God's bounties; haply you will prosper.'" Surah 7:69

"And there succeeded (Fakhalafa) after them a succession (khalfun) who inherited the Book, taking the chance goods of this lower world, and saying, 'It will be forgiven us'; and if chance goods the like of them come to them, they will take them. Has not the compact of the Book been taken touching them, that they should say concerning God nothing but the truth? And they have studied what is in it; and the Last Abode is better for those who are godfearing. Do you not understand?" Surah 7:169

"And to the three who were left behind (khullifoo), until, when the earth became strait for them, for all its breadth, and their souls became strait for them, and they thought that there was no shelter from God except in Him, then He turned towards them, that they might also turn; surely God turns, and is All-compassionate." Surah 9:118

"Had We willed, We would have made angels among you successors (yakhlufoona) in the earth." Surah 43:60

Allah states clearly Nasi are made from the seed of another people.

"Thy Lord is All-sufficient, Merciful. If He will, He can put you away, and leave after you, to succeed you (wayastakhlif), what He will, as He produced you from the seed (dhurriyyati) of another (ākharīna) people (qawmin)." Surah 6:133

He even gives details how Adam (pbuh) was made.

?He is the Knower of the Unseen and the Visible, the All-mighty, the All-compassionate, Who has created all things well. And He originated the creation of humans (al-insani) of clay (min teenin), then He fashioned his descendant (naslahu) of an extraction (sulalatin) of low (maheenin) water (ma-in), then He shaped (sawwahu) him, and breathed His spirit (roohihi) in him. And He appointed for you hearing, and sight, and hearts; little thanks you show.?
Surah 32:6-9

There is only one Nasi spoken of in the Quran who was shaped and had Allah's ruh breathed into him - Adam (pbuh): Surah 15:29, 32:9, 38:72

If all human beings sprung from the joining of one couple, Allah would not make distinction between the bloodline of the Prophets (pbut), as we all would be from the seed of Adam (pbuh).

(dhurriyyatī) offspring: Surah 2:124, 2:128, 2:266, 3:34, 3:36, 3:38, 4:9, 6:84, 6:87, 6:133, 7:172, 7:173, 10:83, 13:38, 14:37, 14:40, 17:3, 17:62, 18:50, 19:58, 29:27, 36:41, 37:77, 37:113, 46:15, 52:21, 57:26
Seed of Adam: Surah 3:33, 6:83-87, 7:172, 17:2-3, 19:58. 57:26

?We have honoured the Children of Adam and carried them on land and sea, and provided them with good things, and preferred them greatly over many of those We created.? Surah 17:70

"That is Our argument, which We bestowed upon Abraham as against his people. We raise up in degrees whom We will; surely thy Lord is All-wise, All-knowing.
And We gave to him Isaac and Jacob -- each one We guided, And Noah We guided before; and of his seed (dhurriyyatihi) David and Solomon, Job and Joseph, Moses and Aaron -- even so We recompense the good-doers -- Zachariah and John, Isa and Elias; each was of the righteous; Ishmael and Elisha, Jonah and Lot - each one We preferred above all beings; and of their fathers, and of their seed (wadhurriyyātihim), and of their brethren (wa-ikh'wānihim); and We elected them, and We guided them to a straight path."
Surah 6:83-87

"And We gave Moses the Book, and made it a guidance to the Children of Israel: 'Take not unto yourselves any guardian apart from Me.' The seed (dhurriyyata) of those We bore with Noah; he was a thankful servant." Surah 17:2-3

"These are they whom God has blessed among the Prophets of the seed (dhurriyyati) of Adam, and of those We bore with Noah, and of the seed (dhurriyyati) of Abraham and Israel, and of those We guided and chose. When the signs of the All-merciful were recited to them, they fell down prostrate, weeping." Surah 19:58

"And We sent Noah, and Abraham, and We appointed the Prophecy and the Book to be among their seed (dhurriyyatihimā); and some of them are guided, and many of them are ungodly." Surah 57:26

The Jinn are human beings.

Jinn are Christians ? Byzantines ? who accepted the Quran: Surah 72:1-18
Jinn are Yahudians ? Persians ? who accepted the Quran: Surah 46:29-30
Jew and Christian polytheists who lead astray: Surah 2:105, 2:120, 2:135, 2:140, 3:67, 3:95, 3:151, 3:186, 5:82, 6:106, 6:137, 6:161, 9:31-33, 10:105, 16:120, 22:17, 98:1-6

Jinn are foreigners among Nasi: Surah 6:128-131, 22:17, 34:12-13, 7:38, 7:179
'Ajam' ? ?Non-Arab? or ?Persian?: Surah 16:103, 41:44, 26:198
Roman-Persian wars: Surah 30:2-4, 105:1-5
Solomon?s Jinn in Quran: Surah 27:16-41, 34:12-13
Solomon's Jinn in previous Books: I Kings 5:13-17, II Chron. 2:17-18, II Chron. 4:4-6

But, but, but... They are made of SMOKELESS FIRE!!!!!!!111111111oneoneoneoneleventeen. (They are of another essence!)

The same people who uphold these superstitious beliefs are often among the many who point to the scientific miracles in the Quran.

One such miracle is Surah 21:30:

"Have not the unbelievers then beheld that the heavens and the earth were a mass all sewn up, and then We unstitched them and of water fashioned every living thing? Will they not believe?" Surah 21:30

This is from the Arberry Quran, translated in 1950. The Yusuf Ali Quran, translated in the 1920s reads:

"Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" Surah 21:30

In 1978, the Nobel Prize was awarded for the theory of the Big Bang. This theory postulates that the universe was one mass - a monoblock - that was blown apart and sent out into the void.

Press release for 1978 Nobel Peace Prize:
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1978/press.html

"A theory developed by the American physicist Gamow and his associates suggested that this synthesis took place at the beginning of the existence of the universe. It is known from studies of the spectra of stars and galaxies that the universe is at present expanding uniformly. This means that at a certain point, 15 billion years ago, the universe was very compact; it is thus tempting to assume that the universe was created by a cosmic explosion, or 'big bang', although other explanations are possible. This 'big bang' theory implies the occurrence of very high temperatures, of about 10 billion degrees. Only at those temperatures can various nuclear reactions take place such that chemical elements could be built up from the elementary particles assumed to be present from the very beginning."

Here Scientists - the largest group of unbelievers I know of who cannot believe in something without proof - are showing how the components of all life and matter in the universe was created in this one Big Bang of intense heat and expansion.

Let's repeat that: "This 'big bang' theory implies the occurrence of very high temperatures, of about 10 billion degrees."
This 'big bang' theory implies the occurrence of very high temperatures, of about 10 billion degrees.
This 'big bang' theory implies the occurrence of very high temperatures, of about 10 billion degrees.

(Note: I even put this in large letters in my previous post, and still you responded with your 'essence' post.)

Jinn created before Nasi of a released, scorching fire:  Surah 15:27, 55:15
?And He created (Wakhalaqa) the jinn of (aljanna min) release (marijin) of fire (min narin).? Surah 55:15
?and the jinn created We before of fire scorching (alssamoomi).? Surah 15:27

While someone who upholds superstition sees evil fire creatures lurking in the aether, I see the intense heat of the Big Bang creating the components of all life itself.

You would think, if the Quran still speaks of the Jinn, there would be some way to know them from the Nasi. After all, Allah makes it clear in Surah 114:5-6 that the Jinn are part of the Nasi:

"Allathee yuwaswisu fee sudoori alnnasi Mina aljinnati waalnnasi" 114:5-6
"who whispers in the breasts of nasi, of jinn and nasi.'" Surah 114:5-6

If we are ALL Nasi, but there are still Jinn in and among the Nasi, there must be some indication of these Jinn that still remains if they are humans, right? If the Quran says it, then we should find some indication of it.

Neanderthal DNA still found in modern Homo Sapiens:

Neanderthals, Humans Interbred?First Solid DNA Evidence:
"The next time you're tempted to call some oaf a Neanderthal, you might want to take a look in the mirror.
According to a new DNA study, most humans have a little Neanderthal in them?at least 1 to 4 percent of a person's genetic makeup.
The study uncovered the first solid genetic evidence that "modern" humans?or Homo sapiens?interbred with their Neanderthal neighbors, who mysteriously died out about 30,000 years ago.
What's more, the Neanderthal-modern human mating apparently took place in the Middle East, shortly after modern humans had left Africa, not in Europe?as has long been suspected."

Read more: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/05/100506-science-neanderthals-humans-mated-interbred-dna-gene/

Study: Neanderthal DNA Lives On in Modern Humans

"Still, other paleoanthropologists say the discovery is not entirely unexpected. There is ample archaeological evidence ? including tools, habitation sites and fossils ? that Neanderthals and early modern humans may have coexisted in the Middle East as much as 80,000 years ago, and certainly in Europe 30,000 to 45,000 years ago. What has been missing until now is the genetic evidence.

"The fact that they found it across the board says that the evidence must be very widespread across modern humans," says Erik Trinkaus, an anthropologist at Washington University in St. Louis, Mo., who has long argued that the human fossils he has studied in France, Romania, the Czech Republic and other places show mixed ancestry. "If you can find evidence [of Neanderthals] after 30,000 years of [human] genetic shifting, then it must have been pretty important or prominent then." Trinkaus speculates that the genetic flow between Neanderthals and early modern humans might have been as high as 10% to 20%.
The new finding may prompt a tweaking of the well-known Out of Africa theory, which in its strictest interpretation says a small group of early modern humans left Africa and outcompeted and replaced all other hominids without any interbreeding. The alternate theory, known as multiregionalism, argues that distinct populations of modern humans developed simultaneously around the world and along the same evolutionary lines by swapping genes.
"What we falsify here is the very hard Out of Africa theory," said P??bo. "We show that outside Africa there is this 1% to 4% that came from archaic humans. Of course, it's totally possible that archaic forms that we don't know contributed to Africans today. I don't think we should take this as evidence that only people outside Africa have some 'caveman' biology within them."
According to Trinkaus, many paleoanthropologists have long believed that early modern humans and Neanderthals interbred. "People have been saying this for decades," he argues. "The minority position was the position that there was no gene flow. Most people who work with the fossil record support some level of admixture."

Whatever our mixing, it is human uniqueness that has also been revealed by the sequencing. By comparing the Neanderthal genome with those of modern humans, the team identified a small number of genetic changes that were newly evolved in modern humans. Some of the changes may have arisen as a result of genetic drift, but others seem to have been positively selected for ? meaning they swept through populations rapidly, possibly because they gave us some advantage."

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1987568-2,00.html

So we do find remnants of the Jinn - Neanderthal man - who was created before Homo Sapien man. We find this in the DNA of Homo Sapien - the Nasi.

So again, while you see different 'essences', I see the intense heat of the Big Bang creating the components of all life itself. All according to Allah's will.

"He said, 'Our Lord is He who gave everything its creation, then guided it.'"
Surah 20:50

So, after reading this, do you still not understand what I believe? If so, let me know.

If you do understand, then please bring proof to show why you believe what you believe. I look forward to reading it.

Had you read the post that preceded your question, you would not see my response as a tactic of 'intimidation' and instead the dismissal of one who refuses to pay attention. ;)

Bring your proof.

Peace.



You're right.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: raginggaijin on July 20, 2011, 12:32:44 PM
You're right.

I'm not right. This knowledge didn't come from me, this came from Allah. All power is due to Him and Him alone.

"It belongs not to any mortal that God should give him the Book, the Judgment, the Prophethood, then he should say to men, 'Be you servants to me apart from God.' Rather, 'Be you scholars (rabbaniyyeena) in that you know the Book, and in that you study.'" Surah 3:79

He tells us to study the Quran so we can become scholars. I am no one special. If He will show me this, He will show it to anybody who wants to know.
Ask Allah to explain to you, to increase you in knowledge. :D

"So high exalted be God, the true King! And hasten not with the Koran ere its revelation is accomplished unto thee; and say, 'O my Lord, increase me in knowledge.'" Surah 20:114

May Allah guide us closer to the Truth.

Peace.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Student of Allah on July 21, 2011, 02:01:01 AM
Salam Raggin-Taggin,

you see, may be its my fault that I did not clarify my point :)

Let us look at the first post in this thread, what this thread actually was started for:

Peace,

I would like to know the point of view of the members of this site on the subject of Evolution.

By Evolution I mean , Darwinian evolution, evolution by natural selection.


Thanks

Allah guide us

-------------------- Student of Allah

You teleported from a topic called "myth vs fairy tale" I believe and continued that here. Now, I must first clarify, reading through your posts, I kind of got some hints about your interpretations, the Neanderthal-Jinn theory is not bad, let me see if I can find reasons to confirm it or throw it in the bin.

What we have failed to realize in this thread is that the thread was not for discussing "Are Jinns Neanderthals ?" or "Genesis of the Jinns" . If you look back at the start of the thread, you will realize its about "Evolution by natural selection" . The tons of evidence or attempts at proving your case has nothing to do with the topic, it just justifies why you believe Jinns are actually Neaderthals (which can be a very good separate thread by the way).

Now I do realise that sometimes , in a thread like "whats your favourite car" one attempts at justifying why he chose a car with more horsepower than a car with superior controls. But, in a 4 page thread, if 3 pages are for debating why horsepower is superior to control, the thread is officially hijacked (according to me atleast).

Dont get me wrong, I liked your reinterpretation using reasoning and logic rather than commonly accepted ideas. Even if you are wrong, you have a case there, you are not simply blindly submitting to common ideas. But let us do some justice to this thread and speak about "Evolution by natural selection" instead of "Are the Jinn neanderthals ?"

I hope you dont get this post the wrong way, and actually see what I am trying to say. :)

PEACE

----------------------- Student of Allah
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Assassino on July 21, 2011, 03:11:34 PM
Salam,

The problem with evolution and muslims are purely cultural and emotional. Evoution is attacked by the christians, nothing unexpected as most of them believe that the earth is around 6000years old or at most 10000 years old. For me, evolution is good to go. Like any scientific theory, the model will improve with time. And I remember someone in this forum, telling me about this muslim back in the 12/13th century i think that discussed such theories. Dont remember the name.


PEACE
-------------------- Student of Allah

Salam,

Can you give me the reason why Christians believe the Earth is 6000 years old? Does it specifically say this in the Bible?
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Student of Allah on July 21, 2011, 09:34:17 PM
Salam,

Can you give me the reason why Christians believe the Earth is 6000 years old? Does it specifically say this in the Bible?

Salam,

As for me, I never found a direct date given by God in the Bible. However, people use the chronology given in the Bible to calculate that.We calculaate backwards in time to find it. For example:

-The prophesied number of years events, division of solomon's kngdom (Ezekeil 4:4-7) gives you approximately 1000 years.
-Another 37 years from the 40 years of reign of Solomon to the start of the temple in the 4th years.
-479 years more if you count 1 Kings chapter 6:1 (start of the temple in the 480th year), this leads them back to the Exodus time.
-Exodus to Abraham, around 430 years ((Gen 12:10/ Exodus 12:40/ Gal 3:17)
-We know Abraham entered Canan when he was like 75 years (Gen 12:4)
-From Abraham's birth to Noah's grandson (Gen 11:11-26), 290 years
-From there we know that the flood took place approximately 2331 BC
-From geneology in  Genesis 5:3-32 we know that there is a time gap of 1656 years between the flood and creation.

This is the way the calculations are done, it brings the total to 6000+ and if you stretch it to maximum for your benefit, its near 10000.
==============================================================================================

Coming back to Evolution, one must realise that the model of Evolution has been improved over time. Charles Darwin couldnt explain everything back then, today we have the technology to understand more things about the subject. This doesnt make Evolution wrong, we rather have a more well refined model of Evolution in comparison to the model provided by Charles Darwin.

PEACE

--------------------------- Student of Allah

 
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: raginggaijin on July 23, 2011, 09:45:20 AM
Peace be with you,
You teleported from a topic called "myth vs fairy tale" I believe and continued that here.

Did you see 'why' I was 'teleported' here? Was there a reason for my coming here or was it on a whim? 

Now, I must first clarify, reading through your posts, I kind of got some hints about your interpretations, the Neanderthal-Jinn theory is not bad, let me see if I can find reasons to confirm it or throw it in the bin.

What we have failed to realize in this thread is that the thread was not for discussing "Are Jinns Neanderthals ?" or "Genesis of the Jinns" . If you look back at the start of the thread, you will realize its about "Evolution by natural selection" . The tons of evidence or attempts at proving your case has nothing to do with the topic, it just justifies why you believe Jinns are actually Neaderthals (which can be a very good separate thread by the way).

If you take a look at the proofs given, you will see the Quran upholds evolution as a process guided by Allah. In proving Jinn are the predecessors of Nasi, we see the evolutionary process.
"He said, 'Our Lord is He who gave everything its creation, then guided it.'" Surah 20:50
If there wasn't an evolutionary process encoded into the creation, then Allah would be changed His way - alsunnati Allahi - and He does not change His way.

Ponder upon what is given and ask Allah to explain it. You will see the principles taught by Allah about creation and how He guides it are found in the theories of quantum evolution; the rapid emergence of higher taxonomic groups.

Personally, I have no idea what more you 'need' to understand that evolution is part of the sunnati Allahi encoded into this creation. I may not have put it into a sound-bite you found palatable, but the information is there for you to confirm for yourself and to turn to Allah and ask Him to explain it to you.

I don't care if people believe me or not. I care if they are reading the Quran and asking Allah to explain it to them.

Now I do realise that sometimes , in a thread like "whats your favourite car" one attempts at justifying why he chose a car with more horsepower than a car with superior controls. But, in a 4 page thread, if 3 pages are for debating why horsepower is superior to control, the thread is officially hijacked (according to me atleast).

Then don't lose hope: My posting in this thread was a response that was brought here because a kgwithnob showed me his response here in reply in another thread. I have brought my proof and answered the questions given. I am not here to beat a dead horse. This is the last post I will make in your thread.

Peace.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: youssef4342 on September 08, 2011, 08:03:59 PM
I thik that Evolution is one of God's systems of perfections.
God stated that he Perfected everything, and how can you perfect things if things are constantly changing?  is not what the so called natural selection brings about?


Also, there is an instance in the Quran where God states that he increases us (humands) in the creation a little "basata",  is this not a direct referance to evolution.
Thus it is God himself who Changes his creation.

What about the virgin birth of jesus, Komodo dragons can produce via virgin birth too!!!
If Mary had the chromosome pair XY, even though she was a female (some females have the male chromosome pair xy),  and God made her body produce an egg fully with the XY chromosome pair, then the result is a virgin male, just like how komodo dragons can produce!
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: drsam on February 09, 2012, 01:48:57 AM
evolution may be correct but how it is  that is a big auestion

i dont think what darwin taught is complete or 100% true  because of some live examples we see daily life that goes against his evolution principles

for example  strong and fit dies to save the weak and unfit very common thing
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Student of Allah on February 09, 2012, 07:40:17 PM
evolution may be correct but how it is  that is a big auestion

i dont think what darwin taught is complete or 100% true  because of some live examples we see daily life that goes against his evolution principles

for example  strong and fit dies to save the weak and unfit very common thing

Shalom Aleikhom,

You are correct. Darwin was like Galileo, like Galileo he did not have perfect physics model. But modern evolution is not the same as the way Darwin proposed.

By the way, evolution does not really say that strong will always survive. The one that can adapt to change the most, usually survives. The effects of evolution is best observed across a huge sample like species. Not across a tiny case involving one person.

Peace
------------ Student of Allah
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: sarah_bd_gemini on May 06, 2012, 06:56:24 PM
I would say that it is. What one often doesn't realise is that, for evolution to occur, there are 'accumulation' of changes in addition to random mutations and natural selection. There is no need for outside forces.

Richard Dawkin's books 'The Blind Watchmaker' and 'Climbing Mount Improbable' are good for getting a deeper understanding of evolution.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: uq on May 07, 2012, 05:37:23 PM
I believe that the theory of evolution as it's presented today is overwhelming. It's extremely hard to refute, in my view. But that's not to say that the theory is without its holes.

Perhaps the most gaping of these holes (and personally, my greatest concern) is that of random mutation. For I have yet to see a demonstration in the way of statistics which yields reasonable and practicable probabilities for the processes of DNA replication of nucleotides or of transcription coding for amino acids in such a way that will bear a viable enzyme or some other viable proteinaceous product which will contribute to the overall survival of a given organism, dependent on no other factor but sheer randomness. I cannot imagine, given any stretch of time, how such gross improbability is overcome.

And it should be pointed out that the probability of ?devolution?, in this respect, has the exact same likelihood as evolution, i.e., if an ancestral individual of a species of bacteria evolved light-sensitive cells, then its descendants, by the same random processes with which it acquired those cells, are just as likely to ?devolve? those very cells.

It reminds me of Henri Poincar?'s experiment on equilibrium fluctuation in 1890. The experiment apparently violates the second law of thermodynamics. It goes along the lines of "no matter how wild and unlikely a fluctuation is, if one only waits long enough, it will occur." When I say ?long enough?, I mean a length of time which precedes the current estimation of the age of the universe.

I believe this to be a major downplayed fact in the scientific community. It seems to me that this insurmountable facet of the theory is taken on good faith. This assumption of theirs is shockingly unwarranted.

Therefore, I am lead to believe that God ?guides? random mutation, and perpetuates the permanence thereof. Or perhaps some other law is at work here. I don?t know.

"وما أوتيتم من العلم إلا قليلا"

I am still uncertain about what conclusions to draw from the above reasoning. I?m still thinking about it.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Magnus on May 08, 2012, 02:59:25 AM
I believe that the theory of evolution as it's presented today is overwhelming. It's extremely hard to refute, in my view. But that's not to say that the theory is without its holes.

Perhaps the most gaping of these holes (and personally, my greatest concern) is that of random mutation. For I have yet to see a demonstration in the way of statistics which yields reasonable and practicable probabilities for the processes of DNA replication of nucleotides or of transcription coding for amino acids in such a way that will bear a viable enzyme or some other viable proteinaceous product which will contribute to the overall survival of a given organism, dependent on no other factor but sheer randomness. I cannot imagine, given any stretch of time, how such gross improbability is overcome.
-------
Therefore, I am lead to believe that God “guides” random mutation, and perpetuates the permanence thereof. Or perhaps some other law is at work here. I don’t know.


The theory of evolution is pretty much a huge gaping hole.
"Random mutation" leaves plenty of room for almighty God to do His works, like you point out.

Then there's  the whole "natural selection" that seems way too simplistic. Sure, there's the pressures of survival/spawning that leads to practical adaptations, I can buy that argument. Where I feel natural selection falls the shortest is in explaining why so many life forms become beautiful in highly impractical ways. I just don't quite see how the world can be all about competition for life and turf and yet the peacock exists. An evolutionist might say that it's because animals want attractive mates, but in my mind there's an apparent contradiction in that since from an evolutionary perspective (being well adapted for survival) it's suicidal to look anything like a peacock, i.e. having non-utilitarian body parts or color schemes. One would think that the imagined "mother nature"  would favor practical adaptations over pretty every time because of the massive "evolutionary advantage"  of something like camouflage over splendid colors?

God says he shaped us from clay, like a potter. This implies a gradual process, and the evidence for this is indeed overwhelming. Exactly how the potter exerts His will on the clay seem a bit of a mystery no matter whom you ask. God surely knows best.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Pazuzu on May 08, 2012, 04:03:01 AM
Quote
God says he shaped us from clay, like a potter.

That's not exactly accurate. This brings to mind the childish story of God forming a clay figurine in the shape of a man, and then "breathing" life into it, thus turning it into a living being, whom He named "Adam" and placed in the Garden of  Aden. Subsequently, this "Adam" became bored all alone, so God took one of his crooked ribs and created "Eve" from it.

This is the stuff that you find in the Old Testament.

What science has been able to prove so far, and beyond any shadow of a doubt, is that the earliest Homo Sapiens (fully developped humans like us), first appeared on this planet some 50,000 - 60,000 years ago, and that, for a time, they existed SIDE BY SIDE with primitive Neanderthals (Cro Magnon).

What science has NOT been able to determine so far is how / when exactly did the jump from Neanderthal to human take place. The answer, as the Quran tells us, is found in the "Histories of the Ancients"  (Arabic:  Asateer ul' Awwaleen).

Interestingly, the word "History" comes from latin Istoria which, in Arabic, is Oustoora The plural of Oustoora is Asateer, which is usually rendered as "legends".

The ancient tablets and scriptures of Yemen, the Nile valley, and Mesopotamia, all point to some divine power, sometimes expressed as heavenly beings (malai'ka - anunaki - etc...) commanded by some greater power (Rahman - Mardukh - Enki - etc...) to REPROGRAM the savage Neanderthal man and make him more "Godlike".

The Quran expresses this as "breathing of the Ruuh" into a primitive and bloodsheding species (Cro Magnon) and turning it into Homo-Sapien.  This basically means that there was some form of divine intervention that took place. The Quran mentions the "Histories of the Ancients" in a context that most Muslims today failed to grasp. In fact, when the rejecters during Muhammad's time heard him recite verses describing the Creation and Resurrection (Era of Judgement), they immediately dismissed Muhammad's words as "Asateer'ul Awwaleen". This means that the Quran is in fact not denying that its verses - as far as those subjects are concerned - are somewhat similar to these ancient "Legends".

As to what exactly is this "Ruuh" (Spirit of Divinity), we will not really know:

{And they ask you concerning the Ruuh Say: "The Ruuh is from the authority of my Rabb and the knowledge you were given was but very little.}...[17:85]

This means that some intervention must have taken place somewhere.

As for how the primitive and savage pre-humans came to being in the first place, I can say for certain that they did NOT evolve from apes.  The most correct theory, and the one that most agrees with the Quran, in my humble opinion, was first openly discussed by the scholars of Al-Andalus (Moorish Spain), in the 13th Century A.D, but it was never accepted by the official schools of thought (They considered it "aberrant" and tantamount to blasphemy of course): It talks about humanoids being born directly from the earth, hatching from embryos in the mud.

You might want to check out this thread:

 http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9602939.0




Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: good logic on May 13, 2012, 03:56:42 AM
I suppose the point I made else where is also valid here.

Yes I sgree some good exchange of views. Well done all those involved.
I like to make a very important point to all this processes:

39:62″ GOD is the creator of all things, and HE is in full control of all things.?

He initiates the start of each process,  and guides it .
The chain of command starts and ends with the;

40:15″ Possessor of the highest rank and ruler of the whole dominion...  "

Keep your interesting debates going.
Peace.

Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: sarah_bd_gemini on May 14, 2012, 07:53:20 PM
http://islamforwest.org/2012/01/09/deism-and-750-verses-of-the-holy-quran/

I disagree with the idea that devolution is just as likely. If there is devolution, then, natural selection will remove it from the gene pool, since it would reduce fitness. Evolution will enhance fitness, hence there will be larger numbers in the next generation.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: uq on May 15, 2012, 04:17:28 AM
Thanks for the link Sarah, I was interested to learn of the deterministic tenets of deism.

I believe that if the statistical probabilities of random mutation were mapped out, then I do think that we would see a course of evolution that is as equally probable for devolution. However, you are correct in pointing out that the survival of "devolved" organisms would be mitigated by natural selection.

What is your position on divine intervention, or the lack thereof, in the evolution of life? and specifically in random mutation?
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: sarah_bd_gemini on May 15, 2012, 07:51:11 PM
What is your position on divine intervention, or the lack thereof, in the evolution of life? and specifically in random mutation?

that it's unnecessary, hence random mutation followed by selection, is enough. Accumulation happens of beneficial changes, it's not going straight from no eye to a human eye in one generation, but gradations, from no eye, to light sensitive cells, which increase in complexity over generations, or start working together, then compound eyes, made up of simple eyes, rods, cones. My point is there are many steps in between that we can't see because eyes don't fossilise easily, but there are creatures with simpler eyes today that probably existed before as well.

anyway, my understanding of things is still evolving, so I can't say I have a fixed position on this or anything else. :)
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: uq on May 16, 2012, 06:05:09 AM
Thanks for your reply.

Yes, I too, with respect to my position, am still evolving. :)
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: pi on October 09, 2012, 09:23:05 AM
Hi!
I don't think evolution is completely understood.  We sometimes get to see mutations in animals (it is more common than survival of the fittest). Animals with mutations that effects their colour higher rate of survival than expected.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Recluse on March 18, 2013, 04:45:09 PM
My opinion is simply that mutations and natural selection can't create anything without any sort of intelligent guidence or intervention in the process. Regardless of how many "billions of years" pass. The information in the DNA alone is enough evidence because from our human experience we know that information can't come into existence without a programmer/designer/creator. You don't have to see the software engineer to know that a particular software was designed (created) by someone.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: huruf on March 19, 2013, 12:49:35 AM
This Darwinian thing gets me sick. It is like any other religion. You believe in it or do not believe in it.

There were evolution theories before Darwin not only amongst the islamic civilisations, but also in the western civilisations and there is also the quantic evolution theory. When the study of the history of beings gets rid of the Darwin taint, we may get to talk seriously about it.

Darwin stardom is a brainwashing tool just as any other and makes sure that any talk about evolution, which is a fact of existence, is tainted by the "survival of the fittest" and all against all, philosophy which si very much the thinking code of conquering empires.

Salaam



Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: glorytothegracious on March 26, 2013, 07:35:10 PM
The way I try to understand the universe is to build off of the verses in the Qur'an.  29:20 Say, "Roam the earth and observe how the creation was initiated. Then God will establish the final design. God is capable of all things." How do I know how the creation was initiated? I find the verse 21:30 which says the heavens and earth were joined together then split or disjoined. This is clear to me that God caused the Big Bang. I read 32:7-10 The One who perfected everything He created and He began the creation of the human from clay. Then He made his offspring from a structure derived from an insignificant liquid. Then He evolved him, and blew into him from His Spirit. He made for you the hearing, the eyesight, and the hearts; rarely are you thankful. They said, "When we are buried in the ground, will we be created anew?" Indeed, they reject the meeting of their Lord.
So I build from there. Understand the nature of clay, understand human embryology, and accept only what agrees with the Qur'an.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Ahmad Bilal on April 07, 2013, 11:33:56 AM
Peace, huruf.

This Darwinian thing gets me sick. It is like any other religion. You believe in it or do not believe in it.

This is nonsensical. There is a vast amount of evidence to support Darwin's conclusion concerning evolution by natural selection. Can you say this same thing with regards to the world's religions and their 'creation' stories (myths)? Are you saying that we should reject what the verifiable evidence points to, with regard to biological evolution? Instead, we should believe what a 7th-century book tells us concerning the 'creation' process, even though there's no evidence to support it?

Think about it...

Peace,

Ahmad
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Ahmad Bilal on April 07, 2013, 11:48:29 AM
Peace, glorytothegracious.

The way I try to understand the universe is to build off of the verses in the Qur'an.  29:20 Say, "Roam the earth and observe how the creation was initiated. Then God will establish the final design. God is capable of all things." How do I know how the creation was initiated? I find the verse 21:30 which says the heavens and earth were joined together then split or disjoined. This is clear to me that God caused the Big Bang. I read 32:7-10 The One who perfected everything He created and He began the creation of the human from clay. Then He made his offspring from a structure derived from an insignificant liquid. Then He evolved him, and blew into him from His Spirit. He made for you the hearing, the eyesight, and the hearts; rarely are you thankful. They said, "When we are buried in the ground, will we be created anew?" Indeed, they reject the meeting of their Lord.
So I build from there. Understand the nature of clay, understand human embryology, and accept only what agrees with the Qur'an.

That doesn't sound biased and unsound to you?

Have you ever considered the possible conclusion that, perhaps, the Quran is wrong? Or are you willing to blindly accept whatever it says, regardless of what the evidence points to? The Islamic prophet Jesus speaks of this idea in the Bible, in case you were unaware:

"Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch." (Matt. 15:14)

If your only source of information rests in "blind" belief and conviction, then you have already fallen into a "ditch" (or pit) of ignorance; and as long as you are unwilling to "see", or recognize the [verifiable] truth, you are merely leading others to this same pit, causing them to stumble and fall in the same ditch that you fell into. Maybe that leaves something to think about...

Peace,

Ahmad
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: huruf on April 07, 2013, 02:16:44 PM
Peace, huruf.

This is nonsensical. There is a vast amount of evidence to support Darwin's conclusion concerning evolution by natural selection. Can you say this same thing with regards to the world's religions and their 'creation' stories (myths)? Are you saying that we should reject what the verifiable evidence points to, with regard to biological evolution? Instead, we should believe what a 7th-century book tells us concerning the 'creation' process, even though there's no evidence to support it?

Think about it...

Peace,

Ahmad


So for you there is just that Darwin racist classist would be scientist or religions of the 7th century? That is it? That is all you know? That is indeed very little. You should read and search a little more and learn from real scientists, not an ideologist like Darwin, and what an ideology.

Salaam
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Ahmad Bilal on April 17, 2013, 11:53:30 AM
Peace, huruf.

So for you there is just that Darwin racist classist would be scientist or religions of the 7th century? That is it? That is all you know? That is indeed very little. You should read and search a little more and learn from real scientists, not an ideologist like Darwin, and what an ideology.

Whether Charles Darwin was "racist" or not is of little concern to me. I'm not a 'follower' of Darwin, nor do I take his words to be "divine" in some sense... I'm talking specifically about the theory of evolution by natural selection. Again, all of the modern scientific evidence points to this conclusion. There are thousands of creation stories throughout the world, and there have been millions of them throughout history. In each one, the prescribed god of the people was the one who somehow formed (shaped, created) everything in existence. Yet, not one of these stories can be substantiated by scientific evidence or investigation.

Which creation story are you saying that we should follow - the one written in a 7th century religious book; the one written in the Bible, which predates the Quran by several centuries; the one written on Indian and Mesopotamian sculptures; the one scribed on the walls of ancient Egyptian and Nubian pyramids; or should we accept the rational conclusion that all of the scientific evidence points to?

Peace,

Ahmad
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Man of Faith on April 17, 2013, 12:46:45 PM
Salaam Ahmad Bilal,

Science is not always right and there are many uncertainties regarding creation. Despite this we cannot argue that there has not been an evolution, but spiritualists believe this is controlled by God in one way or another. The direction of evolution is believed to be controlled by the one referred to as God.

Religion does not mean you have to disregard the evolution or the things which can be proved by science. Religion on the other hand cannot be verified by science and has only to do with Faith. You cannot verify God because there are no ways to prove the existence with the instruments or measurements available. It has only to do with believe in the unseen.

Your individual life and experiences can lead to a Faith. But you cannot gauge God's doings because the force is invisible and not of this realm, to a believer.

Even in my religion the world is eternal, energy does not just disappear as you said. The same goes for the energy of a soul in my opinion.

Hope you respect my Faith and understand I am humbly accepting your critical eyes.

God bless you
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Recluse on April 18, 2013, 09:12:00 PM
Peace, huruf.

This is nonsensical. There is a vast amount of evidence to support Darwin's conclusion concerning evolution by natural selection.

That's really not true at all, it's mostly speculation and conjecture. I suggest reading some books by people like Michael Behe and Stephen C. Meyer. I'm going to buy Meyers' newest book that will be published this June or July I believe.

This is also a great site in my view;

http://www.evolutionnews.org/
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: huruf on April 18, 2013, 11:37:02 PM
Peace, huruf.

Whether Charles Darwin was "racist" or not is of little concern to me. I'm not a 'follower' of Darwin, nor do I take his words to be "divine" in some sense... I'm talking specifically about the theory of evolution by natural selection. Again, all of the modern scientific evidence points to this conclusion. There are thousands of creation stories throughout the world, and there have been millions of them throughout history. In each one, the prescribed god of the people was the one who somehow formed (shaped, created) everything in existence. Yet, not one of these stories can be substantiated by scientific evidence or investigation.

Which creation story are you saying that we should follow - the one written in a 7th century religious book; the one written in the Bible, which predates the Quran by several centuries; the one written on Indian and Mesopotamian sculptures; the one scribed on the walls of ancient Egyptian and Nubian pyramids; or should we accept the rational conclusion that all of the scientific evidence points to?

Peace,

Ahmad

Man you repeat yourself and you simply say again what I have just pointed out a sulliness in your ssumptions about people who do not agree with you.

Also in science, never, never, never, is the last word said, because it develops and what is "the truth" one day, next day or next century or next millenium is not true any more. -and interpetation of religious texts of course has followed the science of the day of the interpreter. So the choice you present either this or that is itself unnecessary, unwarranted and unscientific. But there are in the science camp many things which are far more interesting, that the darwinian "Mr. Natural Selection".
I am so eager to meet that person "natural selection"

Salaam

Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: huruf on April 18, 2013, 11:57:05 PM
I quote from the article cited at the beginning, which, funnily, says that Darwin'S survival of the fittest or its improved version "natural selection", in fact, far from being a refutal of "religious" doctrine, is a roper offshoot of it, its offspring. In fact as I said previously, it is not science, it is ideology.


"Marek Glogoczowski THE SYNDROME OF "BLIND WATCHMAKER"

Abstract Few decades ago the German philosopher Martin Heidegger observed that Wissenshaft denkt nicht - the (staff of) science does not think. To this pertinent remark it is worth adding a more recent opinion of the English sociologist Michael Thompson who claims that in Life Sciences we witness a systematic channeling of enquiry
in order to impel knowledge ever further from the truth. An even more radical
critique of contemporary science was formulated by the well-known American
linguist Noam Chomsky. He observes that present social and scientific theories
are mere tools of pillage and enslavement - both of Nature and Society - by
liberalo-criminal ?elites? who are motivated in their behaviour to a large
extend by social teachings of the Old Testament. The author of the present
dissertation follows the path traced by these researchers who are critically
disposed to the present reality. He demonstrates up to which point the Holy
Scriptures - which especially in Anglosaxon countries are still taken as the
source of wisdom and ethics - have influenced the development of modern concepts
of biology. A precise, methodological analysis shows that subsequent, historical
stages of the evolution of the Darwinian - and than neo-Darwinian and
ultra-Darwinian - thought are ?adaptive mutations? of an antique MEME (Memory
Eradicating and Mind Emptying) virus. This spontaneously self-replicating
?cultural virus?, which postulates an ex nihilo origin of the world and life,
was introduced into the Old Testament already during the Babylonian (about 5
B.C.) period of Bible completion. At present, this inherited from the deep
Antiquity MEME virus is at the origin of a specific cognitive illness of our
life sciences, which illness schould be named the Blind Watchmaker Syndrome
(BWS). In order to liberate our minds from the cognitive cataract provoked by
the (post)modern invasion of class meme (creatio ex nihilo) cultural viruses,
the author proposes a cleaning up of minds by the standard method of logical
reasoning supported by conclusions drawn from elementary physics........"

Salaam
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Ahmad Bilal on April 19, 2013, 07:26:44 AM
Peace, Man of Faith.

Science is not always right and there are many uncertainties regarding creation. Despite this we cannot argue that there has not been an evolution, but spiritualists believe this is controlled by God in one way or another. The direction of evolution is believed to be controlled by the one referred to as God.

Religion does not mean you have to disregard the evolution or the things which can be proved by science. Religion on the other hand cannot be verified by science and has only to do with Faith. You cannot verify God because there are no ways to prove the existence with the instruments or measurements available. It has only to do with believe in the unseen.

Your individual life and experiences can lead to a Faith. But you cannot gauge God's doings because the force is invisible and not of this realm, to a believer.

Even in my religion the world is eternal, energy does not just disappear as you said. The same goes for the energy of a soul in my opinion.

Hope you respect my Faith and understand I am humbly accepting your critical eyes.

Indeed, I do respect your position. My argument was with those who propose that there was no evolutionary process, who propose that a mysterious "god" figure created everything out of nothing. If people want to claim that God guided evolution, then that's their prerogative to embrace that ideology. However, claiming that evolution is nonsensical due to Charles Darwin being "racist" is foolish at best... The ideas you presented with regard to the soul being a form or variation of 'energy' is very interesting, and this same idea has been propagated, in a sense, by the Hindus for a very long time - hence, their traditional view of transmigration (or reincarnation).

Peace,

Ahmad
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Ahmad Bilal on April 19, 2013, 07:44:18 AM
Peace, huruf.

I quote from the article cited at the beginning, which, funnily, says that Darwin'S survival of the fittest or its improved version "natural selection", in fact, far from being a refutal of "religious" doctrine, is a roper offshoot of it, its offspring. In fact as I said previously, it is not science, it is ideology.


"Marek Glogoczowski THE SYNDROME OF "BLIND WATCHMAKER"

Abstract Few decades ago the German philosopher Martin Heidegger observed that Wissenshaft denkt nicht - the (staff of) science does not think. To this pertinent remark it is worth adding a more recent opinion of the English sociologist Michael Thompson who claims that in Life Sciences we witness a systematic channeling of enquiry
in order to impel knowledge ever further from the truth. An even more radical
critique of contemporary science was formulated by the well-known American
linguist Noam Chomsky. He observes that present social and scientific theories
are mere tools of pillage and enslavement - both of Nature and Society - by
liberalo-criminal ?elites? who are motivated in their behaviour to a large
extend by social teachings of the Old Testament. The author of the present
dissertation follows the path traced by these researchers who are critically
disposed to the present reality. He demonstrates up to which point the Holy
Scriptures - which especially in Anglosaxon countries are still taken as the
source of wisdom and ethics - have influenced the development of modern concepts
of biology. A precise, methodological analysis shows that subsequent, historical
stages of the evolution of the Darwinian - and than neo-Darwinian and
ultra-Darwinian - thought are ?adaptive mutations? of an antique MEME (Memory
Eradicating and Mind Emptying) virus. This spontaneously self-replicating
?cultural virus?, which postulates an ex nihilo origin of the world and life,
was introduced into the Old Testament already during the Babylonian (about 5
B.C.) period of Bible completion. At present, this inherited from the deep
Antiquity MEME virus is at the origin of a specific cognitive illness of our
life sciences, which illness schould be named the Blind Watchmaker Syndrome
(BWS). In order to liberate our minds from the cognitive cataract provoked by
the (post)modern invasion of class meme (creatio ex nihilo) cultural viruses,
the author proposes a cleaning up of minds by the standard method of logical
reasoning supported by conclusions drawn from elementary physics........"

You can call the theory of evolution by natural selection an "ideology" if you want. However, ultimately, that does nothing to substantiate your point. The concept of biological organisms coming into existence and development by the works of a "grand designer" can't be proven at all. Yet, all of the modern scientific evidence clearly points to natural selection as being the tool used to develop species. If the author of the article makes the presumption that there is a 'watchmaker' (in the words of Professor Richard Dawkins), then the same conclusion is drawn from a scientific perspective regarding him being 'blind'. If you're asserting that this 'watchmaker' is a living, thinking being, capable of using a vast amount of skill and intellect, then you'll have to prove this using verifiable evidence.

We can start with the question of locality and origination... Where is this god, and where did he come from? If everything must have a beginning, designer and purpose, then describe the facets of this god. How old is he, who designed him, and what is his purpose?

Peace,

Ahmad
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: huruf on April 19, 2013, 08:06:46 AM
Why7 do you keep answering my messages and quoting me and then go off and talk about things I have not said at all, and invent what I say a answer what you invent and do not answer what I actually write?

If you want to have your way you do not need to go to all that trouble. Have it. I could not care loess about having it my way your way or the cat's way. So have it your way all for yourself. But you are completely missing the point and you seem not to be able to read what is written.

Salaam 
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Man of Faith on April 19, 2013, 11:20:40 AM
Peace Ahmad,

I find both the Buddhist and Hindu Faith to be really interesting actually. However, Buddhism suits my mindset best to be honest, but the fundamental idea of Hinduism is also interesting.

The spiritual approach is more prominent than in traditional Islam and that is more what Islam, or "God's religion", is about. Searching for an inner peace or balance is most important because that will lead you to become more peaceful outwards too.

People should think more deeply what the words of Islam really mean, ie symbolizing what. Islam, Muslim and Salam all come from the same root in Arabic and it suits the traditional Buddhist practices very well. I mean the meditation and focus on your soul development.

People are usually a bit narrow-minded unfortunately. And they preach the religion, but forget proper conduct as according to a mind in a permanent meditative state. Most of us do, and it is why I think few are qualifying for a perfect harmony and to continue to the next world. The Hindus have a good word for it, but I have forgot what it was. It is when you are not reborn again, in their faith.

For example, you annoy the crap out of people here with your provoking remarks and people must restrain themselves. I try to control myself and see objectively on what you have uttered and rationally and logically reply to you to the best of my ability. Still you only say what is on your mind and what is your opinion although very determined words, and you ask intelligent questions for the most part as far as I am concerned.

I see through the clouds, I think, and I can see you as a man who believes in something, but not right knowing what it is. Am I right?

You are very picky and you want absolutely utterly rational and logical answers to your own questions you carry inside of you, right?

You are not satisfied with what the common world religions and their beliefs have to offer. You search for answers beyond them, yes?

Basically, you are right, God's religion is not bound to a religion with an invented name. The present religious groups, including Quran alone / God alone, are too isolated in their spectrum of ideas and do not see beyond the Quran, it has become their idol instead of the Message, a universal one present in several "religions".

Islam is not a religion in that regard, and the Bible does not say what Believers are called, Christian is an invented name and Judaism is not mentioned either. Muslim is a definition which could be used in any religion and it means to meditate and concentrate that you live constantly in a state of prayer and get a soul balance so you have an inner peace within you helping you in your behavior with other human beings (souls).

So there really exists no religion. However, Quran with its Arabic talks about "Deen" or a way of life, which is true, so you can erase religion altogether from the map.

Meditation (or Salat as it is also called) is the way to go. You can contact God's spirit through it, commonly called Holy Spirit in the Ibrahimic "religions". It truly is no hocus pocus. God can reside inside you to some extent, with spirits.

Or you can be an empty soul without God or meditation, living the life as the everyday human.

The "religions" are so severly misunderstood. It is sad actually. It is a huge focus on the individual soul we posses, the one inside your consciousness and you develop it best by becoming "deep" with meditation and reflection on yourself and how you can "increase your Karma".

Righteous deeds are of course bound to this "Karma" and can be all from a sincere smile to giving away all your money to help poor people.

Sorry, I feel this post got pretty much off-topic, I am sorry about that, but I somehow hope you find some of the words valuable for your personal development.

Note: When I talk about God I do not exclusively talk about a specific God, just the good spirits which may portray God as one unit. Why do you think God say "We" in the Quran when it clearly is God who is the doer of something?

Perhaps His might is not restricted to one entity or why else would He say "We"? Still he says He does not need any help to accomplish anything, so He must be able to function in plural making it traditionally polytheistic.

If you worship "We" then it is traditionally polytheism, right?

I think, when God refers as "We" He means through spirits. How it works exactly is still beyond me, but I am searching for answers, especially through meditation.

When common religions, usally seen as polytheistic, talk about their spirits, as in the native American (Indian) religion, it may still not be "shirk" if you know what I mean?

Hope you found what I wrote valuable, maybe we should create another thread for this.

God bless you, or May the Force be with You
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Ahmad Bilal on April 19, 2013, 11:52:13 AM
Peace, Man of Faith.

That was an outstanding post, sir. Thanks for your input. I'm going to look more into the ideas you proposed, and perhaps we can start a new thread on that. Thanks again!

Peace,

Ahmad
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Student of Allah on May 09, 2013, 12:10:39 PM
Shalom Aleikhem,

That's really not true at all, it's mostly speculation and conjecture. I suggest reading some books by people like Michael Behe and Stephen C. Meyer. I'm going to buy Meyers' newest book that will be published this June or July I believe.

This is also a great site in my view;

http://www.evolutionnews.org/

Can you please cite the peer reviewed scientific journals where these two individuals published their work destroying evolution via natural selection. I will be happy to see those works and will applaud when these 2 individuals get their nobel prizes for this achievement. :)

I am waiting for the peer reviewed scientific journals....


Peace
----------------- Student of Allah
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Recluse on June 10, 2013, 09:34:49 AM
Shalom Aleikhem,

Can you please cite the peer reviewed scientific journals where these two individuals published their work destroying evolution via natural selection. I will be happy to see those works and will applaud when these 2 individuals get their nobel prizes for this achievement. :)

I am waiting for the peer reviewed scientific journals....


Peace
----------------- Student of Allah

Salaam,

Please have a look at the information here;

http://www.discovery.org/a/2640

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/02/intelligent_des056221.html
 
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Nazzam on September 19, 2013, 08:17:55 PM
Peace,

I would like to know my the point of view of the members of this site on the subject of Evolution.

By Evolution I mean , Darwinian evolution, evolution by natural selection.


Thanks

Allah guide us

-------------------- Student of Allah

One of the biggest miracles of God.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Recluse on September 20, 2013, 08:03:47 PM
Evolution is not unguided. That is just impossible.

Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: GODsubmitter on November 16, 2013, 11:44:18 AM
Another interesting video where there is a lot of explanation about THE USE of mathematics in science, life and general reasoning. (Not numerology, mind you! - for people who do not know the difference between numerology and mathematics please go and learn)

Evolution or Creation The Final Argument by Dr. Rashad Khalifa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILaHTACjV1k

In this computer age, we have mathematical laws that tell us whether a certain event is probable or not. If we throw five numbered cubes up in the air and let them fall into a guided straight line, the probability laws tell us the number of possible combinations we can get: 1x2x3x4x5=120 combinations. Thus, the probability of obtaining any combination is 1 in 120, or 1/120, or 0.0086. This probability diminishes fast when we increase the number of cubes. Mathematicians, who are very exacting scientists, have agreed that the probability diminishes to "Zero" when we increase the number of cubes to 84. If we work with 84 cubes, the probability diminishes to 209x10 (raised to the power of) -50.
The probability laws tell us that the probability of the haphazard creation of the exacting sequences of nucleotides into DNA is Zero, many times over. We are not talking about 84 nucleotides; we are talking about billions of nucleotides that must be arranged in a specific sequence.
Some evolutionists have stated that the human gene and the monkey's gene are 90% similar. However, even if the similarity was 99%, we are still talking about 300,000,000 nucleotides that must be haphazardly re-arranged to change the monkey into a human. The human gene contains 30,000,000,000 nucleotides; 1% of that is 300,000,000.

But, I suppose a lot of people do not study Dr. R. Khalifa's work, nor watch those informative videos...

Peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Student of Allah on December 27, 2013, 03:31:21 AM
Shalom Aleikhem,

Another interesting video where there is a lot of explanation about THE USE of mathematics in science, life and general reasoning. (Not numerology, mind you! - for people who do not know the difference between numerology and mathematics please go and learn)

Evolution or Creation The Final Argument by Dr. Rashad Khalifa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILaHTACjV1k

In this computer age, we have mathematical laws that tell us whether a certain event is probable or not. If we throw five numbered cubes up in the air and let them fall into a guided straight line, the probability laws tell us the number of possible combinations we can get: 1x2x3x4x5=120 combinations. Thus, the probability of obtaining any combination is 1 in 120, or 1/120, or 0.0086. This probability diminishes fast when we increase the number of cubes. Mathematicians, who are very exacting scientists, have agreed that the probability diminishes to "Zero" when we increase the number of cubes to 84. If we work with 84 cubes, the probability diminishes to 209x10 (raised to the power of) -50.
The probability laws tell us that the probability of the haphazard creation of the exacting sequences of nucleotides into DNA is Zero, many times over. We are not talking about 84 nucleotides; we are talking about billions of nucleotides that must be arranged in a specific sequence.
Some evolutionists have stated that the human gene and the monkey's gene are 90% similar. However, even if the similarity was 99%, we are still talking about 300,000,000 nucleotides that must be haphazardly re-arranged to change the monkey into a human. The human gene contains 30,000,000,000 nucleotides; 1% of that is 300,000,000.

But, I suppose a lot of people do not study Dr. R. Khalifa's work, nor watch those informative videos...

Peace

I just noticed that you copy pasted this same thing in two of my threads on evolution. Here is your post from the other thread:

Another interesting video where there is a lot of explanation about THE USE of mathematics in science, life and general reasoning. (Not numerology, mind you! - for people who do not know the difference between numerology and mathematics please go and learn)

Evolution or Creation The Final Argument by Dr. Rashad Khalifa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILaHTACjV1k

In this computer age, we have mathematical laws that tell us whether a certain event is probable or not. If we throw five numbered cubes up in the air and let them fall into a guided straight line, the probability laws tell us the number of possible combinations we can get: 1x2x3x4x5=120 combinations. Thus, the probability of obtaining any combination is 1 in 120, or 1/120, or 0.0086. This probability diminishes fast when we increase the number of cubes. Mathematicians, who are very exacting scientists, have agreed that the probability diminishes to "Zero" when we increase the number of cubes to 84. If we work with 84 cubes, the probability diminishes to 209x10 (raised to the power of) -50.
The probability laws tell us that the probability of the haphazard creation of the exacting sequences of nucleotides into DNA is Zero, many times over. We are not talking about 84 nucleotides; we are talking about billions of nucleotides that must be arranged in a specific sequence.
Some evolutionists have stated that the human gene and the monkey's gene are 90% similar. However, even if the similarity was 99%, we are still talking about 300,000,000 nucleotides that must be haphazardly re-arranged to change the monkey into a human. The human gene contains 30,000,000,000 nucleotides; 1% of that is 300,000,000.

But, I suppose a lot of people do not study Dr. R. Khalifa's work, nor watch those informative videos...

Peace


Peace
------------ Student of Allah
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Notexceling on January 16, 2014, 09:09:46 AM
I believe in Devolution.

Most depiction of our ancestral cousins have 2 additions to shape your thought pattern.
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/ce42634d242343fac68e61a863f3256e/tumblr_mo8g542FTd1r46foao2_500.jpg)

1. Extensive hair. There is more evidence to suggest our cousins were more like Aborigines and Africans.

2. Nose shape. Not bone, does not stand the test of time.

Just with these slight changes we can see a more humanoid appearance. I thought I should mention this before beginning.

Its not that I reject the idea of Evolution. It still could have happened.

In the Quran when the angels are asked to prostrate, they respond by ASKING why should we bow to one who causes mischief and shed blood.

Angels don't know the future, Adam has not committed a sin nor has Iblis been removed. More importantly, Angels aren't meant to ask questions.

The question was asked because of previous existence and their behaviour. When Adam appeared roughly around 12-15 thousand years ago, he proved his intelligence to the angels for prostration.

If you ask how do I know the date well homo sapien sapien (meaning modern wise man) appeared at that time.

This new homosapiensapien breed,

1. (Humans) starting use tools to a much higher degree than any other animal, and are the only extant

2. evidence of building fires (preparation and maintenance )

3. cook their food,

4. Only known species to clothe themselves

Prophet Adam (based on evidence) would have come around at this time in the evolution cycle (all of the above fit Quranically)

Especially point 4 "clothing"

I agree with evolution, substantial evidence to support the claim, I believe however the connection between us and our cousins lies in DEVOLUTION.
Why I believe in devolution?

Quran speaks about those who broke sabbath and how he made them become grotesque apes.

twice we are told BE apes (2.65, 7.166) and once we are told.......

[5.60] Say: Shall I inform you of (him who is) worse than this in retribution from Allah? (Worse is he) whom Allah has cursed and brought His wrath upon, and of whom He made apes and swine, and he who served the Shaitan; these are worse in place and more erring from the straight path.

We have two related cousins.
98%+ match with our DNA.


Bonobo (renown for excessive sex)
(http://www.ansci.wisc.edu/jjp1/ansci_repro/misc/project_websites_07/thur07/bonobo%20reproduction/bonobo-sex.gif)

And the chimpanzee (famously causing mischief)
(http://www.flash-screen.com/free-wallpaper/uploads/201204/icos/animal-funny-facebook-timeline-cover-cover-112.jpg)

The only difference between us is a single chromosome, The famous "Chromosome 2"
(http://www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/wp-content/uploads/chr1.jpg)

Besides this chromosome we are 99.6% related to apes.

All great apes apart from man have 48 chromosomes.

Humans have 46 chromosomes (23 from each of your parents)

Currently science believes a fusion of the chromosome led to the creation of humans. In other words, they managed to perfectly align themselves and connect together at the initial stage of reproduction.
It is

There is only one flaw that science tends to forget.

It is extremely rarity of such a phenomena (fusion of chromosomes) to produce intelligent design

but
the rarity of such a phenomena occurring in 2 chimps (the male and the female) at the EXACT SAME TIME is near impossible.

It is more feasible and plausible (even in the world of genetics) that instead of a precise FUSION (that the possibilities of it occurring are near impossible)  to create humans, It all ready came Fused and broke.

i.e We did not come from Apes, it seems they came from us


Hence,
Devolution.

 :whatever:
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Lena on January 16, 2014, 10:06:01 AM
 :!      WOW!  interesting idea!
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: good logic on January 16, 2014, 10:23:09 AM
Peace All.

We did not come from"apes",nor did apes come from humans.

" Be ye as despicable as apes is just an expression in Qoran  meaning "lowest of the low".

GOD created each species as its own.:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5sfHz3xyNc

GOD bless you all.

Peace.





Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: hawk99 on January 17, 2014, 07:04:02 AM
Peace,

I agree with good logic "We did not come from"apes",nor did apes come from humans."

I often wondered "why would apes change into humans, where's the benefit?
Why hasn't the missing link ever been found?
Why aren't apes still changing?

We do evolve:

[71:14] He is the One who created you in stages.


     Darwinian evolution has been proven to be flawed, but has been used in the past to justify our imperialistic
subjugation of non-Europeans, relieving us of our guilt to enslave, annihilate, and exploit the subhuman races since
we are superior by natural selection and the fittest to survive.

The story of Ota benga "man put in the zoo"

http://onehumanrace.com/docs/ota_benga.asp

     Darwinian evolution has been used once again to justify atheism by those who are nonbelievers to assert
that God is not the lord and sustainer of creation, they insist that it is science that is promulgated, but they fail to
understand that God is supernatural, meaning "above" or outside of nature thereby defying the scientific method.

[6:116] If you obey the majority of people on earth, they will divert you from the path of GOD. They follow only
conjecture; they only guess.

Many atheist use fancy language, and conjecture to convince many people of their positions, but in the end they
are simply nonbelievers like their cohorts.


God bless

   :peace:


Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Zulf on January 17, 2014, 07:52:39 AM
Yes.

Also, usually we are fed the all too common black and white dichotomy.. "either you're with us or against us"... or in this case, "either evolution or creation". Portraying it as if these are THE only options is just plain silly, and is something that is accepted by simple-minded or uninformed people. Such extremes themselves are usually not depicting anything near reality.

Atheists, often, wants to portray the human being as just another animal... and ascribe the theory of survival of the fittest to us too. Survival of the fittest is not even the general norm in the animal world. It exists, but not as THE guiding force of nature. The animal kingdom is NATURAL and balanced, without excess or real waste. Even in the animal kingdom you'll find cooperation, even when there might not be any apparent purpose for this cooperation.

When the human being is living a life according to the survival of the fittest, we get where we are today.... war, crime, destruction of the planet, unsustainable and a destructive economic model. When reducing the human being to something that operates, by nature, as per the theory of survival of the fittest, we actually become WORSE than animals. I believe the quran mentions this aswell in some context, that people become worse than animals.... i.e. totally unnatural.. "ungodly".

Both the blind, random and purposeless Darwinian creation and evolution, as well as the religious stories of creation, are no more than fantasies disconnected from anything natural, wholesome and sensible. This is entertainment for the human being, fumbling in the dark, guessing and arguing.

Peace.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: hawk99 on January 17, 2014, 09:40:51 AM

When the human being is living a life according to the survival of the fittest, we get where we are today.... war, crime, destruction of the planet, unsustainable and a destructive economic model. When reducing the human being to something that operates, by nature, as per the theory of survival of the fittest, we actually become WORSE than animals. I believe the quran mentions this aswell in some context, that people become worse than animals.... i.e. totally unnatural.. "ungodly".

Agreed, such doctrines as Darwinian evolution contribute to a poisonous mindset that renders its constituents or
more pointedly "victims" to a state of straying or as you put it  "totally unnatural.. "ungodly".


[7:179] We have committed to Hell multitudes of jinns and humans. They have minds with which they do not
understand, eyes with which they do not see, and ears with which they do not hear. They are like animals; no,
they are far worse?they are totally unaware. (heedless)


I would like for folks to read the article about Ota Benga in my previous post, the article speaks for itself.


God bless

   :peace:
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Jafar on January 17, 2014, 11:00:07 AM
Peace All.

We did not come from"apes",nor did apes come from humans.
Define ape..
And define human..

Quote
" Be ye as despicable as apes is just an expression in Qoran  meaning "lowest of the low".
You're mistaken, 'ape' in that verse is a symbolism of "GREED" as 'monkey' is a symbol of Greed in Israelites culture (and donkey is a symbol of "Steadfast/Patience" within Israeli culture)
and not 'lowest of the low'..

Quote
GOD created each species as its own.:
Please define "As its own"..

Quote
Why aren't apes still changing?
Gorilla, Chimps, Orangutan, Human is still changing as we speak..

Quote
Darwinian evolution has been proven to be flawed, but has been used in the past to justify our imperialistic subjugation of non-Europeans, relieving us of our guilt to enslave, annihilate, and exploit the subhuman races since we are superior by natural selection and the fittest to survive.

"Survival of the fittest" is true and it has nothing to do with 'imperlalistic subjugation' of Europeans to non-Europeans or Muslim to non-Muslim or Christian to non-Christian.

The word "FIT" for human context, means "NICE", "Survival of the NICEST".
And even the Quran told stories of "People around you which WE HAVE DESTROYED" and asked its readers to contemplate on it.

Let's take a look at current world population as empirical evidence.
Sum up the total population of ALL European Countries.
Sum up the total population of ALL Middle Eastern Countries.

Compare each of the above with the total population of China and then India.
Each of those two countries eclipsed the total population of ALL European countries and ALL Middle Eastern Countries.
And then contemplate, whether they have subjugate / colonize / enslave anyone, in comparison to European and Middle Easterners.

The number speaks for itself, the survival of the NICEST.
Those who are not NICE will become extinct / destroyed.
That's indeed among God's universal law.
Human will evolve to become more nicer... as those who are not nice will be cut off from the evolution tree and become extinct..

Salam / Peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: virtueorvice on January 17, 2014, 11:29:05 AM
I would like for folks to read the article about Ota Benga in my previous post, the article speaks for itself.

Salam,

The article you mentioned is a report of man's ignorance, hatred and racism and has nothing to do with evolution.

The article concludes at the end that, "The story of Ota Benga is one of the many tragic fruits of evolutionism. But it is one which contains a lesson in helping us to realize the importance of the Christian teaching that all men are brothers, all descendants of Adam and Eve. If all Christians had stood up for creation at the outset of the Ota Benga incident, this horror story of evolutionary racism might have been averted."

Evolution is a scientific fact and is revealed in the Qur'an. It were Muslim scientist that first studied EVOLUTION long before Darwin.

22:5 O Mankind! If you are in doubt that humanity will one day stand on its feet, and that you will be resurrected back to life after death, consider the process of your own evolution. We have created you in stages: From dust, then from male and female gametes, then from a zygote, then from an embryo, shapely and first shapeless. We thus clearly explain things for you. The embryo and then the fetus stay in the womb until an appointed term according to Our laws. Then We bring you forth as infants and carry you to maturity. While some of you die young, others live to the feeblest old age so that they know nothing after knowing much. (Resurgence of humanity can take place just as) you, O Prophet, see a dry barren land, but when We send down water on it, it vibrates with life and grows all kinds of beautiful plants.

54:3 They adamantly deny the truth and follow their desires. Yet, everything moves to its destination in stages.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: good logic on January 17, 2014, 01:04:45 PM
Peace Virtueorvice.


Of course I believe in evolution within each species. Gradual change to adapt as life progresses.

That is different from  one species becoming another.

If you are saying one species has become another, then bring us proof, or show us an intermediate species?


Peace Jafar

Definition of a human: You are a human.

If you are an "ape" and I am conversing with you, then I am wrong!

Definition of " its own": One species does not change to another!  Example,a dog does not become a sheep?

Peace to you both.

Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: virtueorvice on January 18, 2014, 12:44:11 AM
If you are saying one species has become another, then bring us proof, or show us an intermediate species?

Salam,

Evidence is all around us! On earth and in the visible universe. There are many scientists dedicating their time and energy to studying evolution!

Should we really think that God has placed more than 8.7 million species separately on Earth? Please see: Number of species on Earth tagged at 8.7 million: http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110823/full/news.2011.498.html

Should we believe that God has placed so many stars individually in the sky or should we believe that they have evolved from previous generation of stars and gas/dust clouds?

We have evidence that the Universe came into existence from a small point we cannot yet fully understand. Then it automatically evolved according to the Natural Laws.

Do you want to believe in the LORD of the Bible or Allah of the Qur'an?

Allah of the Qur'an is so Sublime and Intelligent that works through subtle ways and only SCIENTIST can truly understand those ways.

35:28 And of human beings, the crawling creatures and related animals, and the cattle have diverse colors and properties. This is why of all His servants only those with knowledge of sciences can get some idea of the glory of God (by examining the wonders in nature). Surely, God is Almighty, Absolver of imperfections. 

Creation of species on earth is no more different than the creation of the Universe. It all happens in stages driven from previous stages.

79:27 What! Are you the more difficult to create or is the heaven that He built?


Homo Sapiens have evolved, along with some other groups that are extinct now, from previous less developed species.

Homo Sapiens and Chimpanzees have 99% of their genes the same.

Humans and Chimpanzees have had a common ancestor long time ago.

All species evolved on earth from some simple, less intelligent and less developed form of life.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: good logic on January 18, 2014, 04:31:04 AM
Peace Virtueorvice.

Evolution is a GOD guided process.
My understanding and yours may not be as far as you think.

The water that condensed at the early stages of the development of the earth and formed the seas oceans mixed with the dirt to form mud. Out of the molding mud was born the simplest living organisms in the shape of bacteria and single cell organisms. From this common origin of both plants and animals was developed two types of microscopic organisms. The first type gave birth to all plants while the second type developed into animals. The first of these primitive organisms is thought to have come to exist around 2.7 billion years ago. All these organisms originated from water then gradually developed into more complex living creatures that moved to land. This fact is also started in the Quran:

[Quran 21:30] Do the unbelievers not realize that the heaven and the earth used to be one solid mass that we exploded into existence? And from water we made all living things. Would they believe?

It is indeed interesting, and along the same lines, to note that it was found that all liquid in our bodies ( blood, saliva, tears, sweat?.etc ) contain the same percentage of salt as is found in the oceans.

From the early organisms that moved to land developed the first reptiles around 200 million years ago. The first birds flew around 130 million years ago and the first man, Homo Habilis, walked on earth one million years ago. The first Homo Sapiens, who are thought of as our direct ancestors, walked on earth a mere 15, 000 years ago.

Today, when human tissue is analysed, it is found to contain exactly the same eighteen most abundant elements in the earth's crust. These are:

Oxygen, Silicon, Aluminium, Iron, Calcium, Sodium, Potassium, Magnesium, Hydrogen, Chlorine, Iodine, Manganese, Phosphorous, Lead, Copper, Silver, Carbon and Zinc.

The Quran very accurately instates that fact with the following words:

[Quran 23:12] We created the human being from a certain kind of mud.
The fact that we are created from clay is indeed mentioned in the Scripture preceding the Quran, however, it is the word 'sulalah' which literally means (an active representative sample) that includes the biological fact that coincides with modern knowledge.


However it was all programmed to come as different species by the Intelligent designer.Through DNA codes. Just the same as you come from one single cell,then develop into a grown human with different organs of different functions.

Praise be to GOD the creator of everything.

GOD bless.


Peace to you.


Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: virtueorvice on January 18, 2014, 05:07:31 AM
Peace Virtueorvice.

Evolution is a GOD guided process.
My understanding and yours may not be as far as you think.

The water that condensed at the early stages of the development of the earth and formed the seas oceans mixed with the dirt to form mud. Out of the molding mud was born the simplest living organisms in the shape of bacteria and single cell organisms. From this common origin of both plants and animals was developed two types of microscopic organisms. The first type gave birth to all plants while the second type developed into animals. The first of these primitive organisms is thought to have come to exist around 2.7 billion years ago. All these organisms originated from water then gradually developed into more complex living creatures that moved to land. This fact is also started in the Quran:

[Quran 21:30] Do the unbelievers not realize that the heaven and the earth used to be one solid mass that we exploded into existence? And from water we made all living things. Would they believe?

It is indeed interesting, and along the same lines, to note that it was found that all liquid in our bodies ( blood, saliva, tears, sweat?.etc ) contain the same percentage of salt as is found in the oceans.

From the early organisms that moved to land developed the first reptiles around 200 million years ago. The first birds flew around 130 million years ago and the first man, Homo Habilis, walked on earth one million years ago. The first Homo Sapiens, who are thought of as our direct ancestors, walked on earth a mere 15, 000 years ago.

Today, when human tissue is analysed, it is found to contain exactly the same eighteen most abundant elements in the earth's crust. These are:

Oxygen, Silicon, Aluminium, Iron, Calcium, Sodium, Potassium, Magnesium, Hydrogen, Chlorine, Iodine, Manganese, Phosphorous, Lead, Copper, Silver, Carbon and Zinc.

The Quran very accurately instates that fact with the following words:

[Quran 23:12] We created the human being from a certain kind of mud.
The fact that we are created from clay is indeed mentioned in the Scripture preceding the Quran, however, it is the word 'sulalah' which literally means (an active representative sample) that includes the biological fact that coincides with modern knowledge.


However it was all programmed to come as different species by the Intelligent designer.Through DNA codes. Just the same as you come from one single cell,then develop into a grown human with different organs of different functions.

Praise be to GOD the creator of everything.

GOD bless.


Peace to you.

I wrongly thought that you think God has placed each species directly from the heavens upon the earth. I'm sorry for the misunderstanding.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Jafar on January 24, 2014, 10:31:31 PM
Peace Virtueorvice.


Of course I believe in evolution within each species. Gradual change to adapt as life progresses.

That is different from  one species becoming another.

If you are saying one species has become another, then bring us proof, or show us an intermediate species?


Peace Jafar

Definition of a human: You are a human.

If you are an "ape" and I am conversing with you, then I am wrong!

Definition of " its own": One species does not change to another!  Example,a dog does not become a sheep?

Peace to you both.

On species: WHAT IS A SPECIES?

Everything gradually change overtime, yes it's everything, including the planet the star, the galaxies, the carbon and non-carbon based being that live in the planet etc..
For the carbon and celluloid based being that live in the planet, they invented a category called "Species".
One "Species" does and can evolve into multitude of "Species".
The exact definition of "WHAT IS A SPECIES" is a hot debate at the moment.

The example of "Dog become a sheep" is irrelevant, it is like saying "Muhammad Ali become Michael Jackson".
BUT.. A species within dinosaur family does evolve to become birds of today.

The question should be: "Who is the common ancestor of Dog and Sheep?"
This is as relevant as "Who is the common ancestor of Muhammad Ali and Michael Jackson?"

ON DEFINITION OF HUMAN.
Be more clear and concise on the matter, if it's merely ability to communicate, then see this, Gorilla can communicate with Human through sign language.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GorgFtCqPEs

Does that makes human and gorilla as "ONE SPECIES"?

Salam / Peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: good logic on January 24, 2014, 11:16:00 PM
Peace Jafar.

Thank you for your comments.

Please read post 104. You may or may not agree.

In short Evolution is a GOD guided process.

GOD bless you.

Peace.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Jafar on January 24, 2014, 11:37:27 PM
In short Evolution is a GOD guided process.
GOD bless you.

OF COURSE IT IS, AS ALL ASPECT OF LIFE! (not only evolution)
Your hair will not fall if it's not in accordance to the Will of "Master of All Universes".
In scientific lingo God is known by the word Nature.
Law Of Nature, Nature Dictate Evolution etc... which is actually one of the same thing..

The root cause of all of this 'rejection' of "Evolution" from specific group of people is not on the "Evolution" itself.
But more due to the Assyrian/Babylonian originated Myth of ADAM and EVE in EDEN, as told in the book of Genesis which they 100% believe as all fact!
And the myth do not fit to the way evolution works..


Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Ahmad Bilal on April 08, 2014, 10:50:05 PM
Peace, Jafar.

In scientific lingo God is known by the word Nature.
Law Of Nature, Nature Dictate Evolution etc... which is actually one of the same thing..

I just got a chance to check out this thread, and I have a view similar to the idea that you convey in your post: ALLAH (God) is synonymous with Nature, the Universe, energy, etc. Many people tend to disagree with this notion, however, because they perceive God as being personal. The Qur'aan appears to support the idea of ALLAH being a personal god as well, due to him communicating with people; sending prophets and messengers; sitting on a throne (whether this is a literal or symbolic 'throne'); carrying out forms of justice; authoring books; being described as "merciful", "knowing", "wise", etc.

Do you believe that the Biblical and Qur'aanic depictions of God are correct? Do you believe that God is personal, in the sense that the Universe is interactive in our affairs (e.g. such as the notion proposed with the "law of attraction" concept)?

The root cause of all of this 'rejection' of "Evolution" from specific group of people is not on the "Evolution" itself.
But more due to the Assyrian/Babylonian originated Myth of ADAM and EVE in EDEN, as told in the book of Genesis which they 100% believe as all fact!
And the myth do not fit to the way evolution works..

I agree with you on this point, at least for the most part... I think there are some people who reject the concept of evolution, via natural selection, because they don't want to be linked and compared to "mere animals". Humans are naturally egotistical, and they tend to hold themselves 'above' every other species and aspect of existence. Therefore, when scientists propose the idea that we are all apes, some people become offended.

Also, some people look at the complexity of life, and they determine that humans (and even some animals) are far too complex to have stemmed from a single-celled organism. These people often don't understand how evolution works, and they tend to make references to the implausibility of "an ape giving birth to a human" - which actually isn't how the evolutionary process works at all.

Again, many of them reject it because they don't understand it. I do believe that many (if not most) of the people who reject the notion of evolution do so due to the Biblical "Adam and Eve" story. However, this isn't the reason all of them reject it, and I think the root problem ultimately stems from the egotistical nature of humans, who refuse to be "lowered" to the level of animals, rather than the mythological Biblical story.

Peace,

Ahmad
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Jafar on April 10, 2014, 11:14:25 AM
Peace, Jafar.

I just got a chance to check out this thread, and I have a view similar to the idea that you convey in your post: ALLAH (God) is synonymous with Nature, the Universe, energy, etc. Many people tend to disagree with this notion, however, because they perceive God as being personal. The Qur'aan appears to support the idea of ALLAH being a personal god as well, due to him communicating with people; sending prophets and messengers; sitting on a throne (whether this is a literal or symbolic 'throne'); carrying out forms of justice; authoring books; being described as "merciful", "knowing", "wise", etc.

Do you believe that the Biblical and Qur'aanic depictions of God are correct? Do you believe that God is personal, in the sense that the Universe is interactive in our affairs (e.g. such as the notion proposed with the "law of attraction" concept)?

First, we need to trace the background on how this mindset of "personality" and it's opposite "non-personality" came into existence within human mindset.

Human is an arrogant species, they think high of themselves and they always think that they are above 'others'.

They only see others of their own kind as "personal" and deserve 'their respect', well as matter of fact some of them used to think that some of their own species are not "personal" and enslaved them.

In absolute reality "personal" and "non-personal" do not exist, it only exist within human arrogant mindset.

Thus the question of whether God is "personal" or "non-personal" can be answered with God is BOTH and MORE...

Quote
I agree with you on this point, at least for the most part... I think there are some people who reject the concept of evolution, via natural selection, because they don't want to be linked and compared to "mere animals". Humans are naturally egotistical, and they tend to hold themselves 'above' every other species and aspect of existence. Therefore, when scientists propose the idea that we are all apes, some people become offended.

Well said,
In absolute reality, human are animals, human are mammals and human are primates.

Quote
Also, some people look at the complexity of life, and they determine that humans (and even some animals) are far too complex to have stemmed from a single-celled organism. These people often don't understand how evolution works, and they tend to make references to the implausibility of "an ape giving birth to a human" - which actually isn't how the evolutionary process works at all.

Again, many of them reject it because they don't understand it. I do believe that many (if not most) of the people who reject the notion of evolution do so due to the Biblical "Adam and Eve" story. However, this isn't the reason all of them reject it, and I think the root problem ultimately stems from the egotistical nature of humans, who refuse to be "lowered" to the level of animals, rather than the mythological Biblical story.

Evolution happened to everything in this universe.
And a species called human makes up very very very tiny winy small part of it...
Whether they reject or accept such fact is irrelevant.. as irrelevant as their presence on this universe.

Salam / Peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: BobaFett on July 10, 2014, 02:54:34 AM
I don't think Evolution theory should be labeled a theory.. how do we falsify it? It is still a hypothesis.

Ignoring that, Darwinian evolution is not possible.

It breaks two laws of science.

1. The law of Biogenesis - Life comes from life. The idea that life came from some "primordial soup" is ridiculous. Do you guys know how complex even the simplest unicellular organism is? Natural processes cannot accomplish this. This is why all these multiverse theories are popping up, even with the vastness of our universe it is extremely unlikely for life to come about in this manner, so now they say "well there could be an infinite amount of universes and our universe is one of the few(perhaps only) with life."

2. The 2nd law of thermodynamics - You can't get order from disorder only greater disorder.

Then you have the chirality problem,  orphan genes.. the list goes on.

This article is very informative and relatively easy to understand
http://www.newgeology.us/presentation32.html

And here's one highlighting just how flaky the "theory" is given evidence from the Cambrian explosion.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/05/more_problems_w059921.html

I guess divinely guided evolution is possible but I don't see the evidence for it.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Arman on July 10, 2014, 03:57:27 AM
The law of Biogenesis - Life comes from life. The idea that life came from some "primordial soup" is ridiculous.

Salamun Alaikum Brother.

The so called "ridiculous" idea appears to be also supported by the Qur'an statements like every creature was created from water (24:45) or humans were created from clay (23:12).

The idea that Qur'an supports the theory of evolution is supported widely even in some cases by traditionalists. For example you may check the site below:

http://www.aljazeerah.info/Islamic%20Editorials/2007/October/Creation%20and%20Evolution%20in%20the%20Holy%20Qur'an%20By%20Hassan%20El-Najjar.htm


Best regards,
Arman
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Man of Faith on July 10, 2014, 05:19:05 AM
Peace,

There is noting ridiculous about that. Of course God had to make a trap for those who do not have faith so that they believe in natural evolution through natural selection. There is still logical fallacies to why everything could just seem to know how to assemble. God is required no matter how you twist and turn it.

And evolution is true and science proves it too so we cannot deny the phenomenon. It just renders God even more amazing when reflecting upon nature, evolution and the universe.

God bless you

Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Jafar on July 10, 2014, 07:16:51 AM

There is noting ridiculous about that. Of course God had to make a trap for those who do not have faith so that they believe in natural evolution through natural selection.

Natural selection or God's selection it doesn't matter as the selection was, is and will happen.

For human, herewith the 'law', the 'criteria' to be selected.

"Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth."
-- Matt 5:5

Meek = lowly, loving, humble, gentle, peaceful.

The opposite: those who are proud, harsh, hating, warmonger, oppressor shall become extinct and shall not inherit the earth.

Salam / Peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Man of Faith on July 10, 2014, 11:08:29 AM
Peace Jafar,

Your response was not exactly what I was thinking of. I meant that the illusion of a natural evolution is a trap for the people or God could have made so it is obvious that it was all already evolved at a breaking point in history. But it was not.

God bless you
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Arman on July 10, 2014, 07:49:09 PM
Salamun Alaika Brother MoF.

Not Sure what you mean by trap... it is not clear from your response whether you believe in the evolution process or not.

What we observe in the natural word - the evidences from fossil records and DNA records of verious species is the manifestation of the truth (not a trap). Natural world does not lie - falshood is creation of men. I do not believe Allah is playing a game of cat and mouse with us.

The truth is from your Master - so do not be among the doubters.

May Allah guide us all to the straight route.

Regards,
Arman
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Man of Faith on July 10, 2014, 11:06:45 PM
Peace,

I give up here because I seem not to have been able to convey the meaning twice.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: BobaFett on July 11, 2014, 10:03:59 PM
Salamun Alaikum Brother.

The so called "ridiculous" idea appears to be also supported by the Qur'an statements like every creature was created from water (24:45) or humans were created from clay (23:12).


Selam brother.

Like I said above(in less words), if you are suggesting that God evolved things by directly making them evolve in stages that He decides are best then I cannot argue against this, God is all powerful and can do anything. If He decided this is the best path for His creation then there is no reason He could not do it in this way.

But this is what the thread starter asked:

I would like to know my the point of view of the members of this site on the subject of Evolution.

By Evolution I mean , Darwinian evolution, evolution by natural selection.



I only read the first 2 pages before I got bored then I read the last page, so my apologies if the topic has shifted. I stand by my claim that it is ridiculous to believe that evolution through natural selection and random mutation is possible.



The idea that Qur'an supports the theory of evolution is supported widely even in some cases by traditionalists. For example you may check the site below:

Lots of things are supported widely bro, without facts it means nothing.

https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~scranmer/SPD/crichton.html

^ this is a good article highlighting the logical flaws in giving weight to consensus opinions.

It's kinda long so I'll highlight the most relevant parts:

 I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.

Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period.

In addition, let me remind you that the track record of the consensus is nothing to be proud of. Let's review a few cases.

 In past centuries, the greatest killer of women was fever following childbirth. One woman in six died of this fever. In 1795, Alexander Gordon of Aberdeen suggested that the fevers were infectious processes, and he was able to cure them. The consensus said no. In 1843, Oliver Wendell Holmes claimed puerperal fever was contagious, and presented compelling evidence. The consensus said no. In 1849, Semmelweiss demonstrated that sanitary techniques virtually eliminated puerperal fever in hospitals under his management. The consensus said he was a Jew, ignored him, and dismissed him from his post. There was in fact no agreement on puerperal fever until the start of the twentieth century. Thus the consensus took one hundred and twenty five years to arrive at the right conclusion despite the efforts of the prominent "skeptics" around the world, skeptics who were demeaned and ignored. And despite the constant ongoing deaths of women.

There is no shortage of other examples. In the 1920s in America, tens of thousands of people, mostly poor, were dying of a disease called pellagra. The consensus of scientists said it was infectious, and what was necessary was to find the "pellagra germ." The US government asked a brilliant young investigator, Dr. Joseph Goldberger, to find the cause. Goldberger concluded that diet was the crucial factor. The consensus remained wedded to the germ theory. Goldberger demonstrated that he could induce the disease through diet. He demonstrated that the disease was not infectious by injecting the blood of a pellagra patient into himself, and his assistant. They and other volunteers swabbed their noses with swabs from pellagra patients, and swallowed capsules containing scabs from pellagra rashes in what were called "Goldberger's filth parties." Nobody contracted pellagra. The consensus continued to disagree with him. There was, in addition, a social factor?southern States disliked the idea of poor diet as the cause, because it meant that social reform was required. They continued to deny it until the 1920s. Result?despite a twentieth century epidemic, the consensus took years to see the light.

Probably every schoolchild notices that South America and Africa seem to fit together rather snugly, and Alfred Wegener proposed, in 1912, that the continents had in fact drifted apart. The consensus sneered at continental drift for fifty years. The theory was most vigorously denied by the great names of geology?until 1961, when it began to seem as if the sea floors were spreading. The result: it took the consensus fifty years to acknowledge what any schoolchild sees.

And shall we go on? The examples can be multiplied endlessly. Jenner and smallpox, Pasteur and germ theory. Saccharine, margarine, repressed memory, fiber and colon cancer, hormone replacement therapy? The list of consensus errors goes on and on.

Finally, I would remind you to notice where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough. Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E=mc2. Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way.



Anyway, about the link you gave me.. It seems like the guy is trying to force pieces of a puzzle no matter if they fit or not.

Say: "Travel through the Earth and see how He began the Creation. Then, Allah makes the latter Creation.  Allah is capable of (doing) everything"  (Al-'Ankaboot, 29: 20).

This states the Allah makes the latter creation, so it cannot be referring to Darwinian evolution.


Have not those who disbelieve seen (known) that the heavens and the Earth were of one connected entity, then We separated them (from each other), and We made every living thing out of water? Will they not then believe? (Al-Anbiya', 21: 30).

How does "creating every living thing out of water" mean evolution..?


O humans! Be pious (careful of your duty) to your Lord, Who created you from a single self (soul), and from it He created its mate, and from them He has spread a multitude of men and women (Al-Nissa, 4: 1).

This is obviously referring to Adam and Eve and their offspring. The author goes on to say:

This verse tells us that the beginning of life was a single self (soul), then its mate came out of it. Biological science tells us that the earliest form of life was represented by single cell organisms found in water, then these multiplied by splitting themselves. With the course of time, reproduction evolved to become by mating pairs, instead of the archaic forms of splitting or dividing.

So from "single self" we get single celled organism? Then he goes on to say that they multiplied by splitting themselves, but the verse clearly says that God "created its mate".

And then it says "from them He has spread a multitude of men and women". This is obviously referring to sexual reproduction when if it was referring to unicellular life it should be asexual reproduction. Also unicellular life does not have gender.

We know that almost all animals except kangaroos (and penguins) walk on four legs. However, for Prophet Muhammed (Peace and blessings be upon him) and old world humans at the time of revelation (1429 years ago), they did not know that there was an animal which walked on two legs in Australia. Only God knew that and has told us about it, as another piece of evidence that He is the author of the Holy Qur?an, not any human being.

Sure, if you don't count arachnids and insects.. Also, birds are bipedal, I'm sure the Prophet was not a stranger to birds.


32.7. (Allah is He) who has made everything He created better, and He began the creation of the human (being) out of clay.

I can see how this could point to evolution, but still not Darwinian evolution.  I could also make a case against it.


"Here we report exceptionally preserved fossil eyes from the Early Cambrian (~515 million years ago) Emu Bay Shale of South Australia, revealing that some of the earliest arthropods possessed highly advanced compound eyes, each with over 3,000 large ommatidial lenses and a specialized ?bright zone?.

...

The arrangement and size of the lenses indicate that these eyes belonged to an active predator that was capable of seeing in low light. The eyes are more complex than those known from contemporaneous trilobites and are as advanced as those of many living forms."


http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v474/n7353/abs/nature10097.html

Basically the oldest known bug eyes(from 515 mya) are as complex as many modern bug eyes.


50.15. Were We then tired with the first creation? (No), they (nonbelievers) are in confusion about a new creation (resurrection).

This verse confirms the meaning included in 32.7, saying that there was a first creation, the creation of life, which then evolved according to a long process of learning how to adaptat to the environemnt.


It doesn't confirm 32:7 at all, it is talking about different things. 32:7 is talking about how God created Humanity, 50:15 is talking about our resurrection from what I can tell.

The scientific evidence available to us tells us that the beginning of life was in an environment similar to swamps, which are composed basically of water and and earth matter. This produced clay, where the first forms of life began in the form of single cell organisms.

What is the scientific evidence suggesting that this is how life started? Also clay only has trace amounts of organic matter.


71.14. He has created you in diverse (and successive) stages.

I can also see how this could indicate that divinely guided evolution is true, but it is still at odds with Darwinian evolution. But it could also be referring to the developmental stages of a human from zygote to embryo to fetus etc.

Anyway it is a long article so I hope you'll forgive me but I'm going to stop my analysis here. If there is a point you think stands out feel free to highlight it and I will do my best to answer.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Sonny on July 11, 2014, 11:00:47 PM
There is more truth in 'Alice in Wonderland' than is in theory of evolution.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: BobaFett on July 11, 2014, 11:14:37 PM
Now I will make more clear why I think it is ridiculous to believe that life just came together in a swamp or any body of water by it self, which is what Darwinian evolution implies.

orphan genes:

Orphan genes are genes that do not share homologues in genomes of other organisms. This means that they cannot be linked to other lineages based on gene sequences. Depending on what analysis of known species? genomes that is examined, it will indicate orphan genes constitute somewhere between 1-30% of the functional genes in the genome, where 10-20% as the most accepted range.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orphan_gene

So all creatures have these orphan genes(10-20% of the genome) that cannot be traced to any other creature. So much for the scientific consensus that we share 98% of our genes with chimps ey? When you factor in "junk" dna the percentage we share drops even lower.

Chirality:

Chirality referres to "handedness".

From the link I gave in my first post:

"Amino acid molecules that form proteins, and nucleotide molecules that form DNA and RNA resist combining at any temperature.  To combine, they need the help of mechanisms in a living cell or a biochemist in an organic chemistry laboratory.17  It means that nothing happens in the primeval soup, the pond of chemicals where evolutionists believe life began.

DNA is made of only right-handed versions of nucleotides, while proteins are made of only left-handed versions of amino acids.  Yet any random chemical reaction that produced nucleotides or amino acids would make an equal mix of left and right-handed versions of each. Even if the thousands of nucleotides needed to form a DNA molecule, or the hundreds of amino acids needed to form a protein molecule were able to combine from the mix, they would be a jumble of left and right-handed versions that could not function at all. This is the problem of "chirality", and evolutionists have never been able to solve it."


According to Darwinian evolution everything evolved from the most basic unicelled organisms. These organisms came from amino acids and proteins etc. The claim is that they don't know how but these ingredients somehow gave rise to the first unicellular life, some claim the water was struck by lightning etc.

Here is the problem with that story..

    Replication, recombination, and repair
    Transcription
    Cell cycle control, mitosis, and meiosis
    Defense mechanisms
    Cell wall/membrane biogenesis
    Signal transduction mechanisms
    Intracellular trafficking and secretion
    Translation
    Post-translational modification, protein turnover, chaperones
    Energy production and conversion
    Carbohydrate transport and metabolism
    Amino acid transport and metabolism
    Nucleotide transport and metabolism
    Coenzyme transport and metabolism
    Lipid transport and metabolism
    Inorganic ion transport and metabolism
    Secondary metabolite biosynthesis, transport, and catabolism

^ That is a list of all the things required(as far as we know, there might be more added to the list as our knowledge increases) for a cell to function. They must all be present in the cell at the same time, take away any of them and the cell is destroyed, there is no known way for this to happen through gradual evolution.

Currently the story is that all these "building blocks of life" were floating around in water then something happened(like lightning striking the water) and all these proteins and amino acids magically fell into place and formed everything listed above. So I'll say it again, the idea that this can happen through natural processes is ridiculous.


Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Arman on July 12, 2014, 12:23:04 AM
Salam brother.

Thanks for your detailed reply. I am impressed with your vast knowledge in the subject.  :bravo:

Allow me to humbly clarify what I tried to mean. Let me start with quoting the exact words that you said - The idea that life came from some "primordial soup" is ridiculous. What I saw in this particular statement is a rejection of the proposition that organic life can form out of inorganic matter (a rejection which you continue to defend in you last post). I simply wanted to highlight that Qur'an also suggests men were created from wet clay (inorganic matter). So if you are refuting the very idea that it is possible to have life from non living object then that may be against what Qur'an says. So while you reject evolution - which you have all the right to do - just clarify in your mind what is the alternate theory that you do believe and make sure you are evaluating both theories with equal rigor of intellect.

This brings me to your following remark:

...if you are suggesting that God evolved things by directly making them evolve in stages that He decides are best then I cannot argue against this, God is all powerful and can do anything. If He decided this is the best path for His creation then there is no reason He could not do it in this way.

Let me make a few comments on this statement.
1. Yes, you specified quite clearly what I am suggesting.
2. Do you also believe in above or something different?

If you believe in something different -

I beg you to teach me what you believe - with equal level of intellectual rigor that you apply on the theory of evolution. I am eager to learn the alternate theory. If the alternate theory is God created a human shape from clay - literally with His own hands - and then literally breathed life to this doll and then transported two living dolls either in a spaceship or some sort of "inter-dimensional portal" to earth - and then these two humans managed to survive in this hostile world and managed to give rise to human race - Then my friend I am sorry, this theory does not pass the test of my intellect based on what I observe in this world. I believe in my God who gave me my intellect and conscience - I submit to God by upholding my intellect and conscience. Fortunately for me when I read Qur'an I find no compelling reason to accept any theory which my intellect does not support.

If, however, you believe in something similar to me, that is, God created us through the process of evolution -

Then my brother - what is the whole point of debate? I believe in gravity, don't you? I believe two objects of mass attract each other because God has created this rule and every object follows this rule. But for that reason I do not debate the theory of gravity and say I rather believe in "Guided Gravity" or "Intelligent Gravity". If I can believe in gravity as is - as scientists describe it and then also know inside my heart - this is because God wanted it this way... what is the problem with accepting evolution / natural selection as described by scientists and then knowing inside my heart - this is because God wanted it this way. Qur'an asks us to travel through earth and see how God began creation - not read the holy book and see how God started creation. [Unlike, for example, in case of food restriction Qur'an specifically asks to refer to the holy book.]

We need to remember - scientists deal with the observable world - they work with hard data and physical evidence. Allah is in the unobservable realm (al ghaib). We can feel Him, we can know Him - but can never make Him subject to the microscope of scientists. I know you are extremely critical about the idea of consensus for scientists - but as humans that's the best we have got at the moment. So why not accept the current scientific consensus of collective human intellect as the best possible interpretation of the material world (the What and How part of it) until a new consensus develops; and at the same time rely on our conscience and the guidance of the holy books to understand the unobservable aspects of it (the Why part of it). That is the approach we are taking about every other scientific theory, why does evolution needs to be different?

So, as far as I am concerned, did life just came from some "primordial soup"? Yes, most likely it did (until proven otherwise). And because this phenomenon is so unbelievably "cool" it increases my faith in my God who said it to be and it was.

May Allah guide us all to the straight route.

Regards,
Arman
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: huruf on July 12, 2014, 12:41:49 AM
Indeed, great post, Bobafett.

There has been a phenomenon in science which has been very detrimental to it and it has been the creation the star scientist. It may have started with Darwin.

Ideologically, Darwin arranged very well the imperial designs and mindset. So he was made a star. To say "evolution" is to glorify Darwin, but he didn't invent evolution and what he did was to push an idea of evolution which matched ideollogically imperial designs. There are vested interests in maintaning "Darwinian" evolution. Many scientists worked hard on theories of evolution, but all of them were pushed out as if they came from lepers. On the other hand, "darwinian" evolution has been rearranged and rearranged, because the flaws kept cropping up, but the stardom of the man and his "natural selection" (before it was de survival of the fittest) had to be preserved at whatever cost. Yes, very fit Darwin and his managers survivin and surviving.

Very well said the part about the "consensus" science. The examples given are good but I remember the Ptolemy atronomy, with the earth as fixed center, how many centuries that consensus in science did last? It was science right? It must have been true...

The fact is that finding out how life started scientifically (as is the case of many other things) is very difficult, and that there is no reason why anybody should get desperate because we do not kinow, nor since we do not know are we under the obligation of clinging to whatever theory they give us to feel that we are above ignorance and know everything.

Of course we do not know everything, nor will ever, but we may keep learning humbly through time. What we do not need is to adopt anything as "scientific" when we have no certain and verifiable knowledge of it nor start crusades against the ignorant based on things we ourselves do not know.

As to the Qur'an we should BEWARE. We should not be in a hurry to make it match any current scientific fashion, and anything that is undemonstrated and unverified and still pushed down our throats as knowledge, is nothing but scientific fashion. The Qur'an is right, but if it speaks about things of which we yet have no knowledge we are not going to recognize them. To arrange the words of the Qur'an so that they fit the current scientific fashions is cheating ourselves and doing a flawed service to the Qur'an and to those who do not believe in it confirming that the Qur'an is bullshit. We should not tie the Qur'an to any "scientific" purported knowledge. When the Qur'an shows such knowledge and that knowledge really exists if it fits, it fits seamlessly, no need to arrange anything in the Qur'an at all. We may not be sure but the Qur'an is perfectly sure about what it says, it does not hesitate, show gaps or needs to tread carefully. It has knoweledge and it is thorough knowledge.

Just one thing, Bobafett, for the sake of thoroughness: there is not talk of Adam and Eve in the Qur'an.

And thanks for the texts quoted.

Evolution is a fact indeed, but where and how it applies is something else. There have been many theories about it. For a long time, for instance, and after the "darwinian redemption" the formula "function creates the organ" has been despised and ridiculed. But at cell level even atomic level it seems that it was not completely wrong after all and that randomness is not the cause of everything, may be it not the cause of anything at all.

Those who believe in what the Qur'an says, could hardly believe in randomness as the universe ruler, at least that is my feeling and thinking.

Salaam
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Jafar on July 12, 2014, 01:53:39 AM
Thanks for your detailed reply. I am impressed with your vast knowledge in the subject.  :bravo:

Allow me to humbly clarify what I tried to mean. Let me start with quoting the exact words that you said - The idea that life came from some "primordial soup" is ridiculous.

Explain "primordial soup"..

Quote
What I saw in this particular statement is a rejection of the proposition that organic life can form out of inorganic matter (a rejection which you continue to defend in you last post). I simply wanted to highlight that Qur'an also suggests men were created from wet clay (inorganic matter). So if you are refuting the very idea that it is possible to have life from non living object then that may be against what Qur'an says. So while you reject evolution - which you have all the right to do - just clarify in your mind what is the alternate theory that you do believe and make sure you are evaluating both theories with equal rigor of intellect.

Explain then "how did wet clay become human"?

Every "carbon based living being" evolved from carbon.
Carbon evolved from another type of particle.

This paper discussed about the presence of Carbon in the universe.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/282/5397/2204.full

Everything went through evolution..

Having said that, not all 'living being" is based on Carbon, there could be a 'non carbon base lifeform'.

Limiting the scope to only "human", although the exact definition of 'human' is also debatable.

Human is an earth bound animal, a mammalia and a primate.
The human evolved from another form of earlier humanoid. (Homo erectus and friends)
Which in turn evolved from another form of primate.
Which in turn evolved from another form of mammal.
Which in turn evolved from another form of animal.
Which in turn evolved from another form of one cell being.
Which in turn evolved from another form of carbon based being.
Which in turn evolved from another form of particle.
Which in turn evolved from another form of non-particle.

Thus it's also correct to state that human is the son of the star, or the son of nebula gas or the son of carbon etc..

Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Arman on July 12, 2014, 08:37:57 PM
Salamun Alaikum.

Of course we do not know everything, nor will ever, but we may keep learning humbly through time.

Could not agree more! A theory is a theory we must understand it is not the absolute truth. It is subject to continuous scrutiny and change. But the part of the "humble" learning process is to accept the current consensus as the "best we have" and then to refine or challenge it with more research and investigation. To reach to step 2, we need to first step on step 1. I am sure even Copernicus / Galileo first started off with accepting the Ptolemy model - but later they moved away from it based on further research and investigation. Qur'an says the sun and the moon float, each in an orbit. before Copernicus / Galileo followers of Qur'an understood these orbits to be around earth, one science moved on - they found that Qur'an does not necessarily contradict the new scientific consensus - so they accepted it. That's how we remain open to science and sincere to our scripture.

What we do not need is to adopt anything as "scientific" when we have no certain and verifiable knowledge of it ...

Nor do we need to challenge the current scientific consensus just because our forefathers did so when we have no certain and verifiable knowledge of it either. If we are convinced that we can scientifically prove the current consensus wrong - we should reach out to scientists community / science journals etc. with our original research (like Copernicus / Galileo did). Until our objection stands the test of collective scrutiny of mankind our opinion remains just that - an opinion. Once it passes the hurdle - it becomes the new consensus.

...nor start crusades against the ignorant based on things we ourselves do not know.

Sure - but in reality who is in crusade against whom? I do not see any science lover ready to kill a person for his rejection of evolution theory - but I do see fanatics who would be ready to kill "apostates" for believing in evolution theory.

We should not tie the Qur'an to any "scientific" purported knowledge. When the Qur'an shows such knowledge and that knowledge really exists if it fits, it fits seamlessly, no need to arrange anything in the Qur'an at all. We may not be sure but the Qur'an is perfectly sure about what it says, it does not hesitate, show gaps or needs to tread carefully. It has knoweledge and it is thorough knowledge.
The question here is not about tieing Qur'an with anything. The question here is whether we can reject the current scientific consensus based on what Qur'an says. As per my humble reading of the Qur'an the theory of evolution fits quite seamlessly with it. The question of arrangement - rearrangement may not be relevant here because I do not see Qur'an to be arranged in a way to explain scientific theories one by one - so an expectation to find supports of evolution theory arranged in a nice paragraph may be an over-expectation. The key question here is - does Qur'an contradict the current scientific consensus? As far as I am concerned, it does NOT.

If anyone believes Qur'an does contradict evolution theory - I am eager to learn HOW.

May Allah guide us all to the straight route.

Regards,
Arman


Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Pazuzu on July 13, 2014, 12:10:21 AM
Quote
If anyone believes Qur'an does contradict evolution theory - I am eager to learn HOW.


The problem with your approach is that you are viewing evolution as a theory, when in truth it is nothing  but an ideology that is full of holes, propagated purely for political reasons.

We have been placed between a hammer and an anvil:  Either we must take evolution as an undisputable fact, not open to any debate, OR we have to believe in the Biblical fairytale of God creating a clay figurine and then blowing into it, thus turning it into a living man called Adam.

No third option has been given to us.

And therefore, when we read the passages of our creation in the Quran, we end up reading it either through the spectacles of Darwin and Co., or through the spectacles of Ka'ab al-Ahbar, the great Rabbi of Sana'a, and his two studious pupils, Abu Hurayra and Ibn Abbas, the "best interpreters" of the Quran.

God forbid we let the Quran speak for itself!   Isn't it?

I would like you to take a look at the following simple sentence from the Quran, if you truly believe it to be the word of Divinity, and tell me, without beating around the bush, without resorting to acrobatics or manipulation, what it means to you:


{And Allah made you grow from the earth as plants}...[71:17]
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: huruf on July 13, 2014, 01:55:32 AM
Salamun Alaikum.

Could not agree more! A theory is a theory we must understand it is not the absolute truth. It is subject to continuous scrutiny and change. But the part of the "humble" learning process is to accept the current consensus as the "best we have" and then to refine or challenge it with more research and investigation. To reach to step 2, we need to first step on step 1. I am sure even Copernicus / Galileo first started off with accepting the Ptolemy model - but later they moved away from it based on further research and investigation. Qur'an says the sun and the moon float, each in an orbit. before Copernicus / Galileo followers of Qur'an understood these orbits to be around earth, one science moved on - they found that Qur'an does not necessarily contradict the new scientific consensus - so they accepted it. That's how we remain open to science and sincere to our scripture.

Nor do we need to challenge the current scientific consensus just because our forefathers did so when we have no certain and verifiable knowledge of it either. If we are convinced that we can scientifically prove the current consensus wrong - we should reach out to scientists community / science journals etc. with our original research (like Copernicus / Galileo did). Until our objection stands the test of collective scrutiny of mankind our opinion remains just that - an opinion. Once it passes the hurdle - it becomes the new consensus.

Sure - but in reality who is in crusade against whom? I do not see any science lover ready to kill a person for his rejection of evolution theory - but I do see fanatics who would be ready to kill "apostates" for believing in evolution theory.
The question here is not about tieing Qur'an with anything. The question here is whether we can reject the current scientific consensus based on what Qur'an says. As per my humble reading of the Qur'an the theory of evolution fits quite seamlessly with it. The question of arrangement - rearrangement may not be relevant here because I do not see Qur'an to be arranged in a way to explain scientific theories one by one - so an expectation to find supports of evolution theory arranged in a nice paragraph may be an over-expectation. The key question here is - does Qur'an contradict the current scientific consensus? As far as I am concerned, it does NOT.

If anyone believes Qur'an does contradict evolution theory - I am eager to learn HOW.

May Allah guide us all to the straight route.

Regards,
Arman

No, no question of accepting consensus in science. If it works it works, if it does not, no matter how much consensus there is, facts cannot be denied. The fact that persons feel compelled to shut up if they do not see eye to eye with consensus in scientific matters, does not change facts. Facts are facts, there is no consensus needed for them to exist. And nobody is under the duty of becoming blind betcause there happens to be a consensus that this or that should not be seen. If we establish such an aberration in science, we will be going in a path to hell.

You keep speaking about evolution. I think nobody here has denied that there is evolution, that evolution exists, the Qur'an says so.

BUT, big BUT, what kind of evolution? That is the question. "Darwinian evolution" is bullshit, it is imperial ideology hidden under a cloak of scientific pretences. Not even consensus exists on "Darwinian" evolution. That is, consensus may exist amongst "darwinian evolutionists".

Scientific stardom is the denial of science, but we live today in an age of scientific starlets and there are people who delight in just being able to voice the sweet name of god Darwin or Einstein and may be two or three more. Science has been reduced to that, to a couple of popular names attached to a couple of great sounding important words and then one can plapper around as  much as one wants and sound up to date.

So, once again, no, the Qur'an does not support "darwinian evolution". Randomness as the sufficient cause of everything? On the other hand, how do you intend to make the Qur'an fit seamslessly with a series of theories that change according to from where the wind blows which is the set of theories comprised under "darwinian evolution"? How can you make it fit to something that changes continually to adapt to the errors that keep cropping up because simply the theory was neither prooved nor well grounded from the beginning nor it was intended to be? But it is embraced as if it was a religious cause.

You say that no damage has been done by darwinian evolution? Not under that name but it is one of the pillars that sustain the greater establishment if imperial wars and dominions and those have made plenty of victims. Not that emperial establishment it is a product of the "darwinian mind", the darwinian mind is the product of the imperial mentality and an instrument of it. One serves at his or her own peril. .

And I repeat, and Pazuzu has very pointedly underscored it in the previous message:

we are nto stuck between having to swallow darwinian evolution line hook an sinker or to deny evolution. Nobody denies anything, but all people want truth, not fashion nor political correctness. And no, there is no consensus in science, if one thinks something is not true, it is not becoming true because you submit yourself to a consensus. As somebody has already said, that would be politics, not science. If that line between consensus and truth is blurred, then we are lost. And may be that is the reason why so many nations, muslim or not muslim are being kept down. The passion for science is a passion for knowledge and truth without compromise. It sets nobody in danger, tehrefore no need for consensus. If we bring science to the scope of politics, forget it, bye bye science. And we are mostly there now. There is no truth if it is an inconvenient truth, either for getting funds or for getting a cv or whatever.

I sincerelly hope that this is a crisis and that after that there may be a regeneration of spirits and minds and knowledge may again gain respect over lesser things, like popularity, brainwashing, etc. etc.

Salaam 
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: huruf on July 13, 2014, 02:00:58 AM

The problem with your approach is that you are viewing evolution as a theory, when in truth it is nothing  but an ideology that is full of holes, propagated purely for political reasons.

We have been placed between a hammer and an anvil:  Either we must take evolution as an undisputable fact, not open to any debate, OR we have to believe in the Biblical fairytale of God creating a clay figurine and then blowing into it, thus turning it into a living man called Adam.

No third option has been given to us.

And therefore, when we read the passages of our creation in the Quran, we end up reading it either through the spectacles of Darwin and Co., or through the spectacles of Ka'ab al-Ahbar, the great Rabbi of Sana'a, and his two studious pupils, Abu Hurayra and Ibn Abbas, the "best interpreters" of the Quran.

God forbid we let the Quran speak for itself!   Isn't it?

I would like you to take a look at the following simple sentence from the Quran, if you truly believe it to be the word of Divinity, and tell me, without beating around the bush, without resorting to acrobatics or manipulation, what it means to you:


{And Allah made you grow from the earth as plants}...[71:17]


I am so glad to read you... It is so estimulating to see what new stone you are going to upturn and what we find underneath...

Great work on the Qur'an, worthwhile. So much of it has been kept from under the compulsion to make it fit preconceptions... One wonders whether there should not be a Qur'an Liberation Front ...  :)

Thank you for your work and independence.

Salaam
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Sabeel Ameer on July 13, 2014, 02:03:18 AM
excellent post by Pazuzu.

from the verse, i think that the mankind populated like vegetation on the basis of earth/soil. we are from soil and return to soil.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: BobaFett on July 13, 2014, 03:56:21 AM
Peace brother.

I would like to start by saying I think Huruf and pazuzu are spot on.

Thanks for your detailed reply. I am impressed with your vast knowledge in the subject.  :bravo:

I wouldn't call it vast, most of it is in the links I provided mate. :)

Allow me to humbly clarify what I tried to mean. Let me start with quoting the exact words that you said - The idea that life came from some "primordial soup" is ridiculous.

Again bro, I am talking about Darwinian Evolution, this is not the same as the theistic evolution you seem to believe.

What I saw in this particular statement is a rejection of the proposition that organic life can form out of inorganic matter (a rejection which you continue to defend in you last post). I simply wanted to highlight that Qur'an also suggests men were created from wet clay (inorganic matter). So if you are refuting the very idea that it is possible to have life from non living object then that may be against what Qur'an says. So while you reject evolution - which you have all the right to do - just clarify in your mind what is the alternate theory that you do believe and make sure you are evaluating both theories with equal rigor of intellect.

In the natural world it is impossible. Science is the study of the natural world, so scientifically it is impossible. God is not bound by science so for Him anything is possible.. I don't know how to make this any clearer. He can make life from clay, or anything else He chooses to.

It's the same with the big bang, it is scientifically impossible, that's why scientists say the laws of physics break down in the singularity which gave birth to the big bang(look up the plank epoch). What this means is that our known scientific laws do not apply to it, it makes no sense scientifically.. it is a supernatural event, of course no scientist will ever admit this.

Let me make a few comments on this statement.
1. Yes, you specified quite clearly what I am suggesting.
2. Do you also believe in above or something different?


I believe that based on our current scientific knowledge the best answer is "we don't know".

I beg you to teach me what you believe - with equal level of intellectual rigor that you apply on the theory of evolution. I am eager to learn the alternate theory.

I'm sorry bro but I do not have an alternate theory. If someone asks me what is 3145 x 7427 I would not be able to answer, but if the guy next to me said that the answer is 10 I would know he is wrong. It is much easier to tell what is false than to tell what is true.

If the alternate theory is God created a human shape from clay - literally with His own hands - and then literally breathed life to this doll and then transported two living dolls either in a spaceship or some sort of "inter-dimensional portal" to earth - and then these two humans managed to survive in this hostile world and managed to give rise to human race - Then my friend I am sorry, this theory does not pass the test of my intellect based on what I observe in this world.

Interesting, can you explain why you believe that an omnipotent God would be incapable of doing what you said above? What do you observe in this world that suggests God could not do this?

Secondly, the version you gave of creationism above is a very crude one.

I believe in my God who gave me my intellect and conscience - I submit to God by upholding my intellect and conscience. Fortunately for me when I read Qur'an I find no compelling reason to accept any theory which my intellect does not support.

33:72 - Lo! We offered the trust unto the heavens and the earth and the hills, but they shrank from bearing it and were afraid of it. And man assumed it. Lo! he hath proved a tyrant and a fool.

Your intellect cannot accept that God created Adam from clay and placed him on Earth but it has no problem with the sky and earth and hills/mountains being able to think for themselves and decline the trust and know fear?


If, however, you believe in something similar to me, that is, God created us through the process of evolution -

Then my brother - what is the whole point of debate?


I really don't know what the point is, I have already stated several times that I believe it is possible. I have also stated several times that when I say it is not possible I am referring to Darwinian evolution... which again, is what this thread is about.


I believe in gravity, don't you? I believe two objects of mass attract each other because God has created this rule and every object follows this rule.

So where's the graviton? Do you realise that gravity is still one of the mysteries of science? It is the main reason we cannot fit quantum physics and general relativity together.

Also, even if I do believe in gravity what does that have to do with evolution?

what is the problem with accepting evolution / natural selection as described by scientists and then knowing inside my heart - this is because God wanted it this way.

The problem is that the science doesn't support your claims. If it does bring your evidence.

The problem is that the sole reason evolution theory gets so much attention is because it is a step towards not needing God to explain how life came to be. Think about it, what is the importance of evolution theory? What has it given us? Nothing, yet it is by far the most talked about scientific theory.

I suggest you read this article:

http://www.forbes.com/2009/02/23/evolution-creation-debate-biology-opinions-contributors_darwin.html

Here is part of it to help illustrate what I mean, but you should read the whole thing.

In 1942, Nobel Laureate Ernst Chain wrote that his discovery of penicillin (with Howard Florey and Alexander Fleming) and the development of bacterial resistance to that antibiotic owed nothing to Darwin?s and Alfred Russel Wallace?s evolutionary theories.

The same can be said about a variety of other 20th-century findings: the discovery of the structure of the double helix; the characterization of the ribosome; the mapping of genomes; research on medications and drug reactions; improvements in food production and sanitation; new surgeries; and other developments.

Additionally, I have queried biologists working in areas where one might have thought the Darwinian paradigm could guide research, such as the emergence of resistance to antibiotics and pesticides. Here, as elsewhere, I learned that evolutionary theory provides no guidance when it comes to choosing the experimental designs. Rather, after the breakthrough discoveries, it is brought in as a narrative gloss.



We need to remember - scientists deal with the observable world - they work with hard data and physical evidence. Allah is in the unobservable realm (al ghaib). We can feel Him, we can know Him - but can never make Him subject to the microscope of scientists. I know you are extremely critical about the idea of consensus for scientists - but as humans that's the best we have got at the moment

What are you saying?? That since this is the best we can do I should accept evolution as true? Where is the logic in this? I have shown you several cases of the consensus being wrong, why should I accept this one? There is nothing intellectual or scientific about your approach to this topic.

So why not accept the current scientific consensus of collective human intellect as the best possible interpretation of the material world (the What and How part of it) until a new consensus develops;

Have I not made it clear why I do not accept the "current scientific consensus of collective human intellect"? You are also implying that all scientists are in agreement about evolution which is not correct. All the information I have given you is also from scientists, one group just gets more funding and attention from mass media.. I wonder why?

That is the approach we are taking about every other scientific theory, why does evolution needs to be different?

If any other theory had the holes that evolution has in it, it would not be considered a theory.

So, as far as I am concerned, did life just came from some "primordial soup"? Yes, most likely it did (until proven otherwise). And because this phenomenon is so unbelievably "cool" it increases my faith in my God who said it to be and it was.

Okay, well then as far as I am concerned the center of the moon is made up of a giant marshmallow(until proven otherwise). And because this phenomenon is so unbelievably "cool" it increases my faith in my God who said it to be and it was.








Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: BobaFett on July 13, 2014, 04:11:57 AM
You keep speaking about evolution. I think nobody here has denied that there is evolution, that evolution exists, the Qur'an says so.

I would also clarify that even when I say Darwinian evolution is not possible I am referring to macro evolution or speciation. I believe all creatures can adapt to their environment to a certain degree.

For example your nostril hair will grow longer and thicker if you move from an area of low pollution to high pollution.. therefor you have evolved right?

So what do we call it when you move back to the low pollution area and your nose hairs get shorter and thinner again? Have you evolved again? Have you devolved? Or is it simply we were created to survive in an ever changing environment and therefor have inbuilt mechanisms for adapting to it.

http://en.rocketnews24.com/2013/01/23/as-asias-pollution-problem-is-on-the-rise-air-pollution-map-based-on-the-length-of-your-nasal-hair/
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: JavaLatte on July 13, 2014, 01:41:03 PM
BUT, big BUT, what kind of evolution? That is the question. "Darwinian evolution" is bullshit, it is imperial ideology hidden under a cloak of scientific pretences.

Bold:  Indeed.   (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--h4eLCX9klE/UZHjEBYfY2I/AAAAAAAADoo/W5bcUQjtXls/s1600/thumb-up-facebook-emoticon-like-symbol.png)


I think I don't have to follow Darwin's theory of evolution.

Why not open ourselves for another theory of evolution? 


By the way,

if anyone (of new members perhaps) is interested to read brother Pazuzu's understanding and his discussion about "The First Creation", then try to click the link below.

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-PCIqjnVgNFQ/U2Lh-t3zeEI/AAAAAAAAGxY/KYfwOlH458w/s1600/white-star.png)  The First Creation (http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9602939.0)  (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-PCIqjnVgNFQ/U2Lh-t3zeEI/AAAAAAAAGxY/KYfwOlH458w/s1600/white-star.png)

I think that's very interesting and worth to read.


Quote
Scientific stardom is the denial of science, but we live today in an age of scientific starlets and there are people who delight in just being able to voice the sweet name of god Darwin or Einstein and may be two or three more. Science has been reduced to that, to a couple of popular names attached to a couple of great sounding important words and then one can plapper around as  much as one wants and sound up to date.

And it looks like people like Darwin and Einstein have become idols too... perhaps "the science" itself also become the object of worship.


Quote
So, once again, no, the Qur'an does not support "darwinian evolution". Randomness as the sufficient cause of everything?

Bold:  Good question.


Salām.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: uq on July 13, 2014, 07:40:17 PM
Peace,

Further to my previous posts, I would like to reiterate that I find it extremely hard to believe that speciation of organisms here on earth takes place without Divine intervention.

As an example, the statistical probability of the mutation of the gene(s) responsible for the coloration of the coat of the polar bear's ancestor evolving into a fully white coat would be mind-bogglingly improbable if left purely to random mutation. Even with such a "simple" mutation, the amount of time required to allow for such a development would take longer than the time in which polar bears have existed.

As a simpler example, imagine flipping a coin. The statistical probability of guessing how a coin will land in 20 consecutive throws of a coin are very small. The first time you flip a coin, you have a 1 in 2 (50%) chance of knowing whether the coin will land on heads or tails. The second time you flip a coin, your chances decrease to 1 in 4 (25%). The third time, your chances are 1 in 8 (12.5%). The fourth, 1 in 16 (6.25%). And so on, until you reach your 20th flip of the coin, of which the chances are 1 in 1,048,576 (0.00009537%).

In this coin flipping example, we're talking about a coin where the outcome is only one of two (heads or tails). In genetics, the outcome is one of four (G, A, T or C). Therefore the chances of mutation yielding an evolutionarily advantageous protein are greatly decreased; especially if the gene that codes for a protein is longer than 20 base pairs.

The only negating factor to this belief is that there is an as-of-yet undiscovered in-built mechanism in the genetic code of all organisms that somehow predisposes them to yield evolutionarily advantageous mutations. And God is indeed capable of that. But this has not yet been discovered.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: BobaFett on July 13, 2014, 09:11:06 PM
The only negating factor to this belief is that there is an as-of-yet undiscovered in-built mechanism in the genetic code of all organisms that somehow predisposes them to yield evolutionarily advantageous mutations. And God is indeed capable of that. But this has not yet been discovered.

Hi mate.

We know that this is not the case because beneficial mutations are extremely rare while harmful mutations are relatively common. Mutations being genetically passed on are even more rare.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Arman on July 13, 2014, 09:58:31 PM
Salamun Alaikum brothers and sisters.

Thanks a lot for your valuable contributions. The discussion is going into many different directions and I do not find it worthwhile pursuing each loose end of the discussion. I am pursuing the lines of discussion which I feel can be useful to me to shape my understanding of how we came to the earth. Specifically I was hoping to see some good responses on the following two key questions:

1.   What is the alternative theory that can counter theory of evolution and be more consistent with Qur?an and simultaneously make sense.
2.   How and where Qur?an is contradicting the evolution theory.

Alternative Theory:

One major alternative theory seems to be ?We don?t know?. Well ? for me, yes we do not know anything for sure, but the point is not what we know or do not know ? it is rather what is the best we have. And whether the best we have makes sense in light of Qur?an or not.

The other alternate theory that I found is the one proposed by brother Pazuzu, which in a nutshell says ? human beings originated from a group of humanoids (proposed translation of Bashar). And these group of humanoids ? as a group - grew directly from earth like plants (proposed translation of nabaatan). This theory is primarily based on the following 2 verses (translations by Sahih International):


15:26 And We did certainly create man out of clay from an altered black mud.

And

71:17 And Allah has caused you to grow from the earth a [progressive] growth.


I have to thank brother Pazuzu for at least coming up with some alternative theory. However, this alternative theory did not appeal to me much. For the following 2 reasons:

1)   Per my humble understanding the Arabic term ?Bashar? is the common term to refer to any living being. It can be an animal, a humanoid, even angel or jin or human being. We see Mary, mother of Jesus, claim that she has not been touched by any living being (bashar). We also see Allah say that it is not possible for a living being (bashar) that Allah would give him book, wisdom and knowledge and then he would ask people to be slave to him instead of Allah (3:79). To translate the term bashar to mean ?humanoid? is a bit too restrictive for me.

2)   As for the term nabaatan in 71:17 (translated as ?Progressive growth? by Shahih International and as ?plant-like growth? by brother Pazuzu), the same term has been used to refer exclusively to the growth of Mary, mother of Jesus in 3:37 ? and we also know from Qur?an that Mary did not grow from earth like a plant ? she was born of lady Imran. So, the more traditional translation of ?progressive growth? seems appropriate to me.

As far as I am concerned, a progressive growth (71:17), starting from clay (15:26) ? adequately fits in with the evolution theory - it does not necessitate a more dramatic theory of a group of humanoids growing out of earth like plants.

Good try though.

Does Qur?an Contradict Evolution:

I was hoping to get more concrete responses in this line ? but my expectations were not met. Most of us seem to agree that some form of evolution is supported by Qur?an but could not clarify which part of it Qur?an does not support.

Some of you proposed me scientific reasoning on why evolution cannot be true. For those ? if you know you have solid scientific and logical proofs to debunk established ideas ? please do go to science journals etc. and establish your point. Once you have done that I will be eagerly waiting in line to congratulate you ? but as long as you have not done that your propositions remain only as an individual?s opinion. Unfortunately I am not an expert in evolutionary biology so I am not in any position to accept or reject your scientific arguments. You are smart enough ? you can reject collective consensus of scientists ? good for you;  sad for me - I am not as smart as you ? so I tend to rely on the collective consensus of scientists unless it contradicts my faith. Believe me I am really that unsmart - if, based on some new found data, the scientists today reach a consensus that the inside of the moon is indeed a giant marshmalow - I am really naive enough to believe them because it does not contradict my faith. So, in this forum, I am sincerely not looking for scientific or mathematical arguments on why evolution cannot be true - save your research for your PhD thesis ? please bring me evidence from Qur?an.

The only comment on why evolution is not supportable by Qur?an that I found worth discussing is the one below:

Quote
So, once again, no, the Qur'an does not support "darwinian evolution". Randomness as the sufficient cause of everything?

Yes ? ?Randomness? that is the key word ? that is the root of the debate. Now before we start debating on the term let?s explore what this term means, shall we?

What is the best example of a random event? Flip of a coin? Throwing a dice may be, right? Do I believe these events as random? Yes, I do. But at the same time I know that when I flip a coin ? whether it would be head or tail is decided by God. Similarly, when I throw a dice the result is determined by God. So while an atheist definition of the term ?Random? is ?lacking any definite plan or prearranged order? a believer?s definition of the term ?Random? should be ?lacking any definite plan or prearranged order other than will of God (implicit)?. That is the fundamental difference between atheist and believer thought process. So, when an evolutionary biologist says: life came out of inorganic matters as a random event ?

An Atheist would understand: life came out of inorganic matters without any definite plan or prearranged order. Whereas:
A Believer would understand: life came out of inorganic matters without any definite plan or prearranged order other than will of God (implicit).

We, the believers, generally agree to keep the "will of God" implicit in science/mathematics discussion - not because we admit defeat - but rather because we draw a line between materialistic knowledge and theological wisdom. We deliberately agree to keep these two fields separate ONLY so that our disagreement on one field does not hamper our ability to objectively discuss in the other field.

If we are in a mission to make this ?will of God? as a mandatory explicit addition to any intellectual discussion ? we should reject all books of mathematics to make them rewrite to change the word "random" with the phrase "random subject to will of God." We should protest ?Generate Random Number [RND]? button in calculators ? we should insist on ?Generate Numbers based on will of God [WOG]? button.

But if we do accept the term Random as is in mathematics and science discussions ? and are happy to deal with it keeping the ?will of God? implicit -  in every other field of study ? I really do not see the reason to make a big fuzz about it when it comes to evolution theory.

The other word worth noting in the statement ?Randomness is the sufficient cause of everything? is ?cause?. The term cause can have two meanings ? one is ?The reason How? the other is ?The reason Why?. If I get stomach pain ? the cause can be a) because of a signal generated in my brain in reaction to harmful activities of a bacteria inside my stomach. b) because I could not resist myself from eating too much junk food yesterday. A ? is the reason how, B is the reason why.

For me Randomness [will of God implicit] is the sufficient reason how life came to earth BUT NOT the sufficient reason why life came to earth. If any scientist or atheist tries to insist evolution theory explains the reason WHY ? then my friend I have to object and say: "Sorry dear ? this is where you are crossing your boundary". Science does not answer why anything happens or why things are as they are, we all have our own individual perspectives on that. That?s where the reign of science ends and where the reign of philosophy / theology begins.

I believe what we need to protest is how the theory of evolution is sometimes misused to give an impression that it answers why life came to earth. IT DOES NOT. But as of now it seems to be the best available theory to explain how life came to earth  (Note: I am not counting "I don't know" as a theory) - and from that angle I still do not see Qur'an to contradict it.



May Allah guide us all to the straight route.

Regards,

Arman
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: huruf on July 14, 2014, 12:47:52 AM
1. You still do not care to distinguish between different concepts of evolution. That is, you keep moving the posts. No serious discussion ocan be maintained on that base.

2. You may feel obliged to ahere to a particular theory for anything, but that does not mean that everybody should feel the same obligation or need. I may say I favour such or such thought more than another for the moment being, but I cannot accept as a fact something which to me is not a proved fact nor uphold it before others.

3. A coin is something that exists and has two sides. It might also fall on its edge but it is very unlikely. It would have to be contrived.

A lot of things have been written debunking randomness in evolution, you can find them. But at the point where things have a clear direction and thrust, then you cannot take randomness seriously. And there is no randomness, where the results are not random.

I might already have mentionned, that the first to put forward a hypothesis of evolution in modern (western science) thought what in a nutshell has been called "the function creates the organ" which is a purposeful statement. They were not darwinians, and since the creation of the organs that way seemed to encounter a lot of difficulties at that time, given the level of knowledge in other aspects, and there came god Darwin with his theory of survival of the fittest, which philosofically was a pillaar of the imperial mind, all other paths of study of evolution were foreclosed. Of course the survival of the fittest met a lot of problems, unsolved, but somehow the holyness of the darwinian theory had to be upheld and Darwin become a god-star of science. To make more palatable, his survival of the fittest was turned into "natural selection" which again explains nothing.

In fact as far as I know, in spite of the awful close-grip of darwinianism on that part of science there are discordant voices, yes there are, and not necessarily creationnists, (although that is the appearance that is wanted to create), which show the unscientific procedure followed to make out of the modifyed darwinism a valid scientific theory.

In fact, as far as I have been able to gather, "the function creates the organ" has made a comeback, this time at the cell level and at the quantum level. Change is not random, it is purposefully selected by the evolutioning entity itself at the most fundamental level and randomness does not play any role at all.

Please, get me something from the Qur'an that supports the idea of randomness in the evolution or creation of anything. If there is God, then there is no randomness. No. The whole thing narrated in the Qur'an is purposeful. You say the how is randomness. You cannot get a purposeful result out of randomness, not when at each minute stage it entails a set of simultaneous events so numerous as to be baffling and all of them coordinated. Somebody said that getting evolution by randomness was like putting a typewriter by a monkey's side and expecting that he would write the whole Shakespeare works word by word.

Tell me where in the Qur'an God says He uses randomness. Randomness in human speech is another word for ignorance. But you pretend that when we say random we have a theory, but no, we have nothing, we just do not know. To say we do not know is honest, to say we do not know but we will make it as if we did know, is cheating oneself. And the question is to what purpose?

I cannot fathom why you need to adhere to a particular theory if you are ento sure of it. What is the idea? Do they hand out sweets on holidays or what? If we do not know, we do not know. No consensus can change that nor I see any need to assuage anything by proceeding in such a way, unless the sweet feeling of having god-stars like Darwin and company, the jujus of the seudo-scientific "knowledge" is some kind of prize.

I insist, only those who work in these matters at the "highest" level, that is, at the basic, intrincate, fundamental research level, have a clue of how difficult, complex and surprising these things are.

You want that we give you an alternative theory. If we could do that, we would not be here in the forum, we would be doing research and studying these things in an environment much more suitable and would not have any time for chattering. Something which today is not easy at all. Research requires money and money, we know, is not easy to come by. So scientists, unfortunately, are mercenaries who cannot research what they want nor reach the results that honestly they would find, but who must "produce" results translated into money for their employers.

Universities today work for business. They are not independent because to finance any project they need money. The states have given up much of their power and means for research which means that not even that source is available for disinterested research.

To be a real scientist today is no joke and we would be kidding ourselves if we continued to have on an altar the scientific establishment. And if that happens at the "professional" level, imagine what it is like at the "popular" level. 

And still I am puzzled at your need to support any theory or "scientific belief" at all. Why. The world of "money science" will go ahead without my or your approval and they are not going to hand us any priviledged information, let alone knowledge, so what do you get out of believing this or that, of which you have no proof nor find convincing?

I did my bachellor in Geology a long, long time ago, and I am not a scientist neither professionally or vocationally, but I do care not to be fed garbage as a substitute for knowledge. I have too much respect for science, for real dedicated (or frustrated, given the present conditions) scientists who still have a glimpse of the thirst for knowledge, for discovering for pursuing to the end with a passion a difficult road of REAL, hidden, humble search for knowledge.

Of that, the fashion science will not give us anything and it seems that quite the opposite what it creates is the need for people to be "on the right side" of things, on the kosher science, the politically correct science, as if we could negotiate with truth. Truth is not neogtiable. That is the number one law of the scientist. It is logical that in a world whre everything translates into money, there should be an interest in maintaing, also in science, a schizofrenic world of opposites without any other alternative where people can feel they are with the "good ones". So darwinism (evolutionnism) versus creationism. That in itself is a lie. That is a contrived division that does not respond to reality, but we are herded into that or the opposite and anything that does not choose sides is ignored and doen away with. It creates no money nor power. That is the way good people get crucified. when they choose not be on the preset sides, they are eliminated as unassimilable discordants that create strife.

There is a difference between humility and pliability.

Salaam
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Arman on July 14, 2014, 02:39:50 AM
Salamun Alaikum.

1. You still do not care to distinguish between different concepts of evolution. That is, you keep moving the posts. No serious discussion ocan be maintained on that base.

I am not a specialist on Evolutionary Biology. My understanding of Evolution does not stretch much far beyond what we have in this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution#Variation . If you could teach me what are the different concepts of evolution and which concepts are supportable per Qur?an and which are not ? I am eager and open to learn.

2. You may feel obliged to ahere to a particular theory for anything, but that does not mean that everybody should feel the same obligation or need. I may say I favour such or such thought more than another for the moment being, but I cannot accept as a fact something which to me is not a proved fact nor uphold it before others.

May I humbly request you to point out where I have directly or indirectly asked everyone or anyone to feel any obligation OR that I have claimed evolution theory as a "FACT"? All I am trying to understand is ? from Qur?ans perspective what are the contradictions of evolution theory and if there is any alternate theory.

3. A coin is something that exists and has two sides. It might also fall on its edge but it is very unlikely. It would have to be contrived.

A lot of things have been written debunking randomness in evolution, you can find them. But at the point where things have a clear direction and thrust, then you cannot take randomness seriously. And there is no randomness, where the results are not random.

I explained in my earlier post that for me ?Randomness? and ?without any conscious interference other than will of God? are synonymous. I also explained why I am agreeable to keep the ?by Will of God? part implicit in my discussion of science/mathematics.  You have every right to not agree to keep this implicit ? but perhaps for the sake of consistency you should emphasize to make it explicit everywhere.

I might already have mentionned, that the first to put forward a hypothesis of evolution in modern (western science) thought what in a nutshell has been called "the function creates the organ" which is a purposeful statement.

I am looking forward to the advent of this theory.

Please, get me something from the Qur'an that supports the idea of randomness in the evolution or creation of anything. If there is God, then there is no randomness.

Please refer to the discussion on the interpretation of ?randomness? above.

I cannot fathom why you need to adhere to a particular theory if you are ento sure of it. What is the idea?

Good question ? here is why:
When my children would ask me about evolutionary biology ? I would not tell them to write in their exam sheet that it is a false theory. Nor can I tell them ? you write this for the sake of your exam ? but know that it is not true. To me that would be hypocrisy.

What I can do is to explain to my kids that evolutionary theory is the ?currently held consenses interpretation among scientsis? of how it all happened ? but science is not able to answer why it happened. You and me know that all this happened because of ?Will of God?. As far as Qur'an is concerned - the events as described by this theory are "possible" but of course we must understand if it all happened this way -that is because Allah asked it to be this way and it was.

For me that is the most honest answer that I can give to my Kid.

You want that we give you an alternative theory. If we could do that, we would not be here in the forum, we would be doing research and studying these things in an environment much more suitable and would not have any time for chattering.

That is the point I am trying to highlight as well. When there will be an acceptable alternative theory ? I will be happily accepting that. But until that alternative theory is available I see a need to attack the current theory ONLY if it contradicts our faith (i.e. the Qur?an). That is why it is so important to understand how Qur?an contradicts the theory.


There is a difference between humility and pliability.


I take this as a provocation to engage in personal attack. I would respond to this with a sweet smile  :)
May Allah guide us all to the straight route.

Regards,
Arman
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Pazuzu on July 14, 2014, 03:44:30 AM
Quote
Per my humble understanding the Arabic term ?Bashar? is the common term to refer to any living being. It can be an animal, a humanoid, even angel or jin or human being.


I agree, except with the red part.

We are all "bashar", from a purely physiological sense. And the Cro-Magnon man (our ancestors who came before) were also bashar. Like us, they had hair, bones, muscles, blood vessels, a nervous system, etc...

But what makes the Human race different is the concept of Ruuh (the Spirit), which most Muslims can?t seem to wrap their minds about.  There is a divine intervention ? a reprogramming of a sort ? that evolved these primitive ancestors (animal-like bashar) into human bashar.


When you go to study medicine, the faculty is called (in Arabic)  طب بشري  (bashary medicine), because it deals with the anatomy and physiology side of the human. This is not so much different from the veterinary profession.

But when you go to study humanities, you are then involved with things like psychology, sociology, history, even art and theater. These are the things that came as a result of the Spirit (Ruuh).

When Muhammad declared that he was no more than a bashar, it was a response to those who asked him to bring down the wrath of God, or to fly up into the heavens and bring down a book with him. These feats are possible only through mala?ika.  And when the Quran speaks of Isa and his mother as bashar, it immediately refers to them as having to eat food to sustain themselves, and that they had mortal bodies. They were not mala?ika.
So, if you mean by ?angels? the mala?ika, then I disagree with you, because the mala?ika are not bashar.


{And your Rabb said to the Mala?ika: ?I am creating a being (bashar) from clay * So when I have (bettered/ perfected him), and blown of My Spirit (ruuh) in him, then you shall yield to him}...[38:71,72].

The above sign is very simple, once you read it with an unbiased mind.
 
There existed, before us, manlike bipedal beings who were mostly instinctive animals. Their fossils have been unearthed, and proof of their existence cannot be denied. These, the Quran referred to as bashar; meaning , from the pure physiological perspective, beings that were made from earthly materials. I don?t really care what you call them (Cro-Magnon, cave man, Neanderthal, humanoid, etc...) Makes no difference. What matters is that they existed.


Now the above sign speaks of three epochs:

1) Plain bashar created directly from the muck of the earth. This happened some 2-3 million years ago, under certain conditions of heat and pressure. The Quran calls this stage "al-nash'at-ul-ula" (the first creation).


2) Gradual evolution of the bashar's shape, physical attributes and vocal abilities ({when I have bettered/ perfected him}),   until he became Homo-Sapien, creatures very similar to us in shape and size, very intelligent, but still mostly savage hunter-gatherers. This happened some 200,000 years ago.

3) Breathing of the Ruuh into the Homo-Sapien:  This last stage is the one that has been driving your ?scientists? insane.  They were able to estimate it  to some 40,000 ? 50,000 years ago, but they cannot pin it down, nor can they understand how it happened. And they most probably never will. This is the era when the insan (human) became capable of receiving divine revelations, and began to understand his nature as the consciousness of the universe. And the Quran says it coincided with the time when the an3am (livestock) appeared, and the learning of agriculture

The Quran tells us that we shall know very little of this divine phenomenon (3rd stage). It was a direct intervention by God, which caused a leap forward from the final phases of pure bashar, into something else. This is what the Quran means when it says that God told the mala?ika that He shall create a ?khalifa? on the Earth. This means successor. But successor to whom?

The way I see it, the insan/human (bashar + ruuh) was made a successor to the plain bashar (who had no ruuh).  And this sudden leap is the greatest mystery of all.


When the Quran wants to appeal to our intellect by asking us to contemplate the signs of the Creator around us, it never says ?Oh you bashar...look and see? (for example). It says ?Oh you insan...look and see?.   Do you see the subtle difference?

The equation is simple:  bashar + ruuh = insan.


Peace.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Man of Faith on July 14, 2014, 03:55:40 AM
Peace,

I understand the issue and that it may be difficult for a servant of God to live in a secular society that has no faith in God but believes that life stems solely from 'natural selection' and then teach them something opposite privately and to know that school is just talking about theories and they should know the distinction between not having faith and have faith.

Worth teaching them is the logical fallacy of natural selection because even if they develop entirely independantly how could that tiny little cell know into what to develop from the beginning.

But what science observes, empirical research, cannot be denied, but the theory is on how it happened and why. I still am unable to buy the concept of natural selection because the probability that the universe could come into existence with sustainability to provide life without any particular intervention is so minimal that it is nearly non-existent. We cannot deny evolution because we can study it and the reason it is there is because if it was not and we just happened to exist at a point in history then the test would have been too obvious and God does want to expose certain people in a test environment. The question instead of denying evolution is to see who put the evolution in motion and made everything come into existence or triggered the evolution cycle. This is the only heavy pressure point against atheists and if they give some lame excuse then just pardon them and let them drift in their own illusion for there is nothing you can do unless God shows them a sign and they somehow come to their senses.

Apart from the heavy pressure point you can always ask them why the fruits and vegetables seem so convenient to us and why things are created beautifully or imaginative because the animals and vegetation certainly has no need to look pretty or with special features.

How could nature know what would make an animal levitate above the ground. Did it test and find it out itself. Is it intelligent while not being self-aware that virtually brainless entity (if you look on insects for example)?

No matter how much you put faith in natural selection you run into a logical fallacy somewhere. How can the individual cells know in what direction of creation to take? To adapt in evolution the cells need to know what measure of preventive actions to preserve the offspring and it takes intelligence. There needs to be a guiding force from somewhere or a foundation of a system.

Have faith
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Pazuzu on July 14, 2014, 04:12:11 AM
It just occured to me to include the following passage, for brother Armanaziz, to prove that Mala'ika are not bashar:

{But the leaders who rejected from among his people said: "What is this but a bashar like you? He wants to make himself better than you! And if it was indeed the will of Allah, He would have sent down mala'ika. We did not hear such a thing among our fathers of old}...[23:24]

You see, here the rejetors among the elite of Noah's people were expressing their surprise that divine revelation was sent down to a bashar. They had never heard of such a concept before.

Regards.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: BobaFett on July 14, 2014, 05:48:16 AM
1.   What is the alternative theory that can counter theory of evolution and be more consistent with Qur?an and simultaneously make sense.

Why must there be a counter theory for evolution to be wrong?

2.   How and where Qur?an is contradicting the evolution theory.

It depends which version of evolution you are talking about.

One major alternative theory seems to be ?We don?t know?.

"We don't know" is not a theory.

Does Qur?an Contradict Evolution:

Again, it depends on which version of evolution you are talking about. Since God can do anything we could fit evolution theory into the Koran as long as the Koran doesn't specifically say "evolution is bs". You are trying to scientifically justify evolution while admitting that there is a being involved that is not bound by the laws of science and on top of that you claim you are too "unsmart" to understand the science anyway.

Some of you proposed me scientific reasoning on why evolution cannot be true. For those ? if you know you have solid scientific and logical proofs to debunk established ideas ? please do go to science journals etc. and establish your point. Once you have done that I will be eagerly waiting in line to congratulate you ? but as long as you have not done that your propositions remain only as an individual?s opinion.

As much as we are all desperate to impress you, what will your congratulations mean if by your own admission, you do not have the intellect to understand what is being discussed?

Unfortunately I am not an expert in evolutionary biology so I am not in any position to accept or reject your scientific arguments. You are smart enough ? you can reject collective consensus of scientists ? good for you;  sad for me - I am not as smart as you ? so I tend to rely on the collective consensus of scientists unless it contradicts my faith.

I agree, this is very sad.

Believe me I am really that unsmart - if, based on some new found data, the scientists today reach a consensus that the inside of the moon is indeed a giant marshmalow - I am really naive enough to believe them because it does not contradict my faith.

No need to tell me twice, I am convinced. :)

So, in this forum, I am sincerely not looking for scientific or mathematical arguments on why evolution cannot be true - save your research for your PhD thesis ? please bring me evidence from Qur?an.

Given your attitude, I sincerely do not care what you are looking for, I will do what I like with my research and find your assumption that this thread is about you to anyone except you quite amusing. If I find something you say illogical I will point it out, feel free not to read or respond to my posts.

This is the topic:
"I would like to know my the point of view of the members of this site on the subject of Evolution.

By Evolution I mean , Darwinian evolution, evolution by natural selection."

And that is what I have been discussing.


What is the best example of a random event? Flip of a coin? Throwing a dice may be, right? Do I believe these events as random? Yes, I do.

While these things seem random to us they are not truly random, our brains just cannot calculate all the variables, there is nothing truly random in our universe, at least not that we know. The closest thing is nuclear decay, but even that is not truly random since the rate of decay is always the same. I apologise for adding more science to the discussion.. but I think you will be glad to know that there is scientific consensus on this(except most scientists regard nuclear decay as actually random since they cannot predict which particular atom will decay at any given moment).

But at the same time I know that when I flip a coin ? whether it would be head or tail is decided by God.

If you mean that it is decided by the laws of physics that God created then sure, if you mean that you think God personally guides the coin or die every time someone flips/rolls it then lol.

 That is the fundamental difference between atheist and believer thought process. So, when an evolutionary biologist says: life came out of inorganic matters as a random event ?

An Atheist would understand: life came out of inorganic matters without any definite plan or prearranged order. Whereas:
A Believer would understand: life came out of inorganic matters without any definite plan or prearranged order other than will of God (implicit).


Is there a collective consensus of linguists who agree with this statement or is it your individual opinion on randomness? Can you support it using the Koran.. or a dictionary?

Also, soon as you put "the will of God" into the equation randomness is gone. Are you even reading what you write? What plan could be more definite than the will of God?


good luck to your kids with their test.




Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: huruf on July 14, 2014, 06:30:51 AM
Salamun Alaikum.


I take this as a provocation to engage in personal attack. I would respond to this with a sweet smile  :)
May Allah guide us all to the straight route.

Regards,
Arman

What?

I am speaking in general and I think I have made it s clear that this manipulation of the concept of science is being pressed against all people, I have not taken anyone as being exceptional.

Other than that you continue equating evolution with darwinism.

I do not want to convince you of anything, information and writings about theories are available from the net and libraries. I am not a science writer. Better get solid the stuff from soemone other. What I say is that there are varied ideas or theories if you like on evolution and that one does not have to be stuck with one. 

Salaam
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: huruf on July 14, 2014, 06:41:35 AM
Regarding the children, well what is the problem with telling them that you do not know and that they shouldn't think automatically that anything printed or taught is true? You are not the only one who has children and all of us or many have that situation, not that problem, it is not a problem you say what you to your best ability think is true and encourage them to think for themselves. Or tell them, and that comes up frequently with history, that when they answer, they should say

"According to the textbook and what they teacher says..."

That is what I do when I do not want a child to get into trouble.

Salaam
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Arman on July 14, 2014, 09:10:46 PM
Salamun Alaikum.

First of all to Pazuzu ? yes, I now get that angels (malaika) are not supposed to be ?bashaar? ? thanks for correcting me on this. At least from you I am learning something!

I would like to revert on two statements by BobaFett ? which possibly illustrates the difference between our theological understanding - which is hindering us to come to the common ground:

Quote
?  if you mean that you think God personally guides the coin or die every time someone flips/rolls it then lol.

LoL as much as you may ? this is what I believe ? God personally sustains the entire concept we call ?existence? and everything that happens out there - starting from each movement of atom to each supernova happens per God?s will. Flip of coin is not an exception.

If your idea of God is someone who selectively chooses to intervene in some ?important? events of our life and reluctant to the mundane ones ? then our conception of God is strikingly different. 

Quote
Also, soon as you put "the will of God" into the equation randomness is gone.

Yes as soon as we put "the will of God" into the equation; not before that. For study of science and mathematics we usually take a deliberate choice not to put "the will of God" into the equation and adopt a materialistic perspective

If God wills that a basic life form would just spring out of inorganic matter ? all God needs to do is to will it and it will be (kun fa-yakun). From a strict materialistic perspective ? this would look like some random molecules in the inorganic matter coming together to form an organism. It would seem like an extremely unlikely event ? but still a random event ? by no way a materialistic perspective would detect God?s intervention ? because God operates from an unobservable realm (al-Ghaib). If the observer is a person who can understand ? he will see the SIGN of God in this extremely rare ?apparently random? event ? but that is a theological perspective. If a person is someone who has ?disease in their heart? (fi-qulubihim maradun) he would refuse to see the sign, will interpret the random event as a sheer chance without any purpose or direction what-so-ever.

In my earlier post I have tried to explain why this ?materialistic perspective? is critical ? but perhaps my effort was inadequate ? so let me try one more time. When we discuss science and mathematics ? we generally adopt a strict materialistic perspective so that in spite of differences in theological understanding we human beings can productively discuss on the observed phenomena of this world. This is by no way a defeat of theology ? but rather a purposeful separation between theology and science to facilitate a greater good ? the progress of human knowledge.

If understanding the varying perspective of ?randomness? is too abstract for you ? let me give you other examples ? per science day and night are caused by the rotation of the earth about its axis. But Qur?an says Allah turns the night into day and the day into night. While we believers wholeheartedly believe the later to be true ? we do not debate the claim of science because we agree that earth?s motion causes day and night - from a strict materialistic perspective. But we do know that's HOW it happens, not WHY it happens - we know it happens because of God?s will, but we keep this perspective implicit.

Same goes with the study of climate. What causes rain, thunderstorm, flood ? when we study science we explore these questions from strict materialistic perspective (keeping the "will of God" purposefully out of the equation / implicit). Then once the materialistic interpretation is understood ? some of us are fortunate enough to see the sign of God in it ? while some others are not.

When Huruf says, "According to the textbook and what they teacher says...", I believe it is referring to this very  materialistic perspective:

According to the textbook and what they teacher says, the movement of earth causes day and night ? this is possibly mechanically correct, but we have enough wisdom to understand that it happens per will of God. (the statement in italic implicit)

According to the textbook and what they teacher says, it rains when cloud droplets grow and combine to become so large that their fall speed exceeds the updraft speed in the cloud, and they then fall out of the cloud ? this is possibly mechanically correct, but we have enough wisdom to understand that it happens per will of God. (the statement in italic implicit)

My question is if we are OK to adopt this materialistic perspective on every other field of science then why we cannot adopt the same for creation teory? Why cannot we just say:

According to the textbook and what they teacher says, life span out of inorganic matter and gradually evolved through natural selection to give rise to higher level organisms including humans ? this is possibly mechanically correct, but we have enough wisdom to understand that it happens per will of God. (the statement in italic implicit)

? especially since Qur?an does not contradict this kind of understanding.

If you are convinced that the theory of evolution is not even mechanically correct ? then I would say one day or other the more accurate mechanically correct version of ?origin of species? theory would triumph over the current weaker version ? BUT ? and a very big BUT it is ? for all possible likelihood even in the more accurate mechanically correct version of ?origin of species? theory (be it ?the function creates the organ? theory or whatever) ?God?s will? is still going to remain as implicit.

In fact if a theory has God physically /mechanically involved in arranging DNA strands to create a life form ? I would absolutely protest that because that would portray God as a ?heavenly being? limited in time and space. God is not a being limited in time and space ? He is the originator of the heavens and the earth, time and space ? when He decrees a command He only asks it to be and it is. From a materialistic perspective sometime it looks like a random event ? sometimes it looks like application of Newton?s law of physics ? sometimes it looks like application of theory of relativity. From my theological perspective, events in this universe are neither random, nor law driven ? everything is a manifestation of God?s will.

To all those who reject the Evolution Theory - if you are rejecting based on some materialistic argument - I totally get that. But I not being the right person to judge that argument- can only hope someday good materialistic logic would replace weaker ones and we will have a more refined theory. Until that happens, we are stuck with the current version of evolution theory as the "best available theory" which scientists accept and not necessarily contradict the Qur'an. BUT if your primary contention to the evolution theory is that it claims life came out of a random event - it does not recognize "will of God" in the equation - then my question to you is - do we not purposefully keep "will of God" out of the equation for every other field of science? Why target creation theory alone?

May Allah guide us all to the straight route.

Regards,
Arman
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: BobaFett on July 14, 2014, 11:23:39 PM
I am glad to see you have chosen to take a more amicable tone. :)

LoL as much as you may ? this is what I believe ? God personally sustains the entire concept we call ?existence? and everything that happens on earth. Starting from each movement of atom to each supernova happens per God?s will. Flip of coin is not an exception.

If your idea of God is someone who selectively chooses to intervene in some ?important? events of our life and reluctant to the mundane ones ? then our conception of God is strikingly different.


I agree He is the Sustainer. My idea of God in this context is "someone" who created the laws of the universe, so each atom in the universe obeys His law. I don't think He is telling each atom what to do at every moment. At the same time I have no doubt that He could do as you believe.

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

God governs the law(s) and His creation obeys them.

The other problem is that if we were able to calculate the variables(weight and density of the die, density of the surface it is being rolled on, friction, wind, gravitational pull etc.) we could accurately predict how the die will land. This would mean that we know the mind of God, which is obviously unfathomable to us. But in reality we just have an understanding of His laws, not His self.

Yes as soon as we put "the will of God" into the equation; not before that. For study of science and mathematics we usually take a deliberate choice not to put "the will of God" into the equation and adopt a materialistic perspective.

Not really.

Firstly the will of God is always in the equation.

Secondly the laws of Mathematics and Physics are Gods law. God decided that 1+1 should equal 2 and it does, that doesn't mean He is causing 1+1 to equal 2 every time someone punches it into a calculator, the law is set, there is nothing anyone can do to break it.


If understanding the varying perspective of ?randomness? is too abstract for you ? let me give you other examples ? per science day and night are caused by the rotation of the earth about its axis. But Qur?an says Allah turns the night into day and the day into night. While we believers wholeheartedly believe the later to be true ? we do not debate the claim of science because we agree that earth?s motion causes day and night - from a strict materialistic perspective. But we do know that's HOW it happens, not WHY it happens - we know it happens because of God?s will, but we keep this perspective implicit.

Mate, something is either random or it isn't. If from your perspective something seems random then there is something wrong with your perspective.

Another way of saying "per science day and night are caused by the rotation of the earth about its axis." is "Day and night are determined by the laws of physics that govern the rotation of Earth".

Another way of saying "Allah turns the night into day and the day into night." is "Day and night are determined by the laws of physics that govern the rotation of Earth".


Can you explain how removing God from anything can make that thing better?

Also, we do know why something is happening, because that thing is subservient to Gods Law. We also know why God made the Law the way it is, because that is the best choice to make. I guess we just don't know why it is the best choice.

According to the textbook and what they teacher says, it rains when cloud droplets grow and combine to become so large that their fall speed exceeds the updraft speed in the cloud, and they then fall out of the cloud ? this is possibly mechanically correct, but we have enough wisdom to understand that it happens per will of God. (implicit)

If God doesn't exist science tells us how things work. If God does exist science tells us how God makes things work, there is no need to to separate God from the equation if you believe He exists.

So for this example you could say "According to scientists this is how God makes it rain" and then proceed to explain the stuff about the droplets etc.

for all possible likelihood even in the more accurate mechanically correct version of ?origin of species? theory (be it ?the function creates the organ? theory or whatever) ?God?s will? is still going to remain as implicit.

Agreed.


In fact if a theory has God physically /mechanically involved in arranging DNA strands to create a life from ? I would absolutely protest that because that would portray God as a ?heavenly being? limited in time and space.

How so? this seems to contradict your earlier statement "God personally sustains the entire concept we call ?existence? and everything that happens on earth. Starting from each movement of atom to each supernova happens per God?s will."

God is not a being limited in time and space ? He is the originator of the heavens and the earth, time and space ? when He decrees a command He only asks it to be and it is. From a materialistic perspective sometime it looks like a random event ? sometimes it looks like application of Newton?s law of physics ? sometimes it looks like application of theory of relativity. From my theological perspective, nothing is random ? nothing is law driven ? everything is a manifestation of God?s will.

It seems to me God has clearly chosen to manifest His will in the form of laws. It is easy to say "nothing is law driven", it is not so easy to actually live your life as if you truly believe it is so. Otherwise you should be incredibly surprised every time you drop something and it goes down instead of up.

Of course, God knows best.


Peace.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Arman on July 15, 2014, 12:08:32 AM
Salam brother.

Quote
If God doesn't exist science tells us how things work. If God does exist science tells us how God makes things work, there is no need to to separate God from the equation if you believe He exists.

What I mean by keeping "will of God" out of the equation - is refraining from explicitly mentioning "will of God" in science discourse - I am not meaning forgetting God. God IS always part of the "real" equation - but for the purpose of science we choose to keep this implicit. Since you are refuting a point which I am not making I have to understand I have still not been able to communicate my argument about "materialistic perspective" clearly enough - but unfortunately, I have reached the limit of my expression ability and time so I would just leave it there. Just be honest and ask yourself: In study of climatology or astronomy - do we deliberately keep the words "by will of God / by law of God" implicit or not? If you find an honest answer to that you should understand what I am saying.

Quote
In fact if a theory has God physically /mechanically involved in arranging DNA strands to create a life from ? I would absolutely protest that because that would portray God as a ?heavenly being? limited in time and space.

How so? this seems to contradict your earlier statement "God personally sustains the entire concept we call ?existence? and everything that happens on earth. Starting from each movement of atom to each supernova happens per God?s will."

The key words are the ones highlighted in red - "physically /mechanically involved". I believe God sustains us somewhat like we sustain our imagination - He is way above physically /mechanically getting involved in this creation. This is the same reason why the whole concept of "Son of God" is absurd. Whatever God wills He just wants it to be and it is - this is true for the creation of Jesus, just as much it is true for creation of Adam - Allah is far above of getting physically /mechanically involved to get anything done.

May Allah guide us all to the straight route.

Best regards,

Arman


Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: huruf on July 15, 2014, 12:16:07 AM
I know that Armanaziz has said that when he says evolution he refers to darwinian evolution, but since he seems to be setting against the introduction of the intervention" of God, for the sake of clarity I insist that reducing evolution to "darwinian" evolution is a falsification of facts. There is no such a choice as between darwinian avolution and no evolution. This is open field, there are many possible types of evolution. The question is completely open.

Salaam 
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Arman on July 15, 2014, 12:38:09 AM
Salamun Alaikum.

I know that Armanaziz has said that when he says evolution he refers to darwinian evolution, but since he seems to be setting against the introduction of the intervention" of God, for the sake of clarity I insist that reducing evolution to "darwinian" evolution is a falsification of facts. There is no such a choice as between darwinian avolution and no evolution. This is open field, there are many possible types of evolution.  The question is completely open.

Salaam

This is the area where I am open to learn as well. I am really not knowledgeable about "many possible types of evolution". So if there is any material on this - and any perspective on why a particular type of evolution theory is better fitting with Qur'an I am eager to learn that.

However if the only value addition of the modified theory is that it puts the words "by will of God" in the conventional evolution theory - then don't bother. I agree to such addition, but I already explained why keeping that part implicit is acceptable for me.

May Allah guide us all to the straigh route.

Regards,
Arman
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: huruf on July 15, 2014, 01:57:09 AM
I think I made it clear that I refer strictly to the scientific world in the language of the scientific world and for me the there is no such thing as a division of science between God and no God, but between good science and sloppy science.

Darwinian evolution, from hte begining has been a loppy science because the result to be reached always came first, not what honestly could be ascertained. That of course giving due place to the fact that in researche there is always a certain degree of conjecture, sufficient to push forward the research, but not to condition it to the preconceived resuelt one wants.

We have seen that kindof conjecture in the forums: many times we ask ?What if:? sometimes it comes to something useful or revealing, many times it does not, but it is bad when from the start we assert it must be so no matter what is uncovered. I have learnt a lot that way, and I think many of us have. Of course, since this is a field not subject to experimentation and only to observation, we may not agree on many things, but that is logical since in human sciences the variation is infinite and many things may be true to a certain extent but not absolutely and we are never absolutely objective, although we can become more and more objective. that is purify ourselves as to our motives and honesty.

Salaam 
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: virtueorvice on July 18, 2014, 03:59:13 AM

The problem with your approach is that you are viewing evolution as a theory, when in truth it is nothing  but an ideology that is full of holes, propagated purely for political reasons.

I would like you to take a look at the following simple sentence from the Quran, if you truly believe it to be the word of Divinity, and tell me, without beating around the bush, without resorting to acrobatics or manipulation, what it means to you:


{And Allah made you grow from the earth as plants}...[71:17]

Salam,

Dr. Shabbir Ahmed has translated the verse you quoted as 71:17 And God has caused you to grow as a growth from the earth. [Recall the beginning of life out of water and organic matter, and the stages of evolution. 22:5]

Muhammad Asad has also given a similar rendition.

Not everything that the theory of evolution says is correct neither it is addressing all the problems; nevertheless, everything has happened/is happening in measured stages and working according to divine laws.

Whatever has happened to "bashar" that turned him into "Insan" must be discovered and addressed through natural phenomena.

There are some theories and explanations that address the problem of "bashar" vs. "insan" in a good and rational manner. But I agree with you that the mainstream "theory of evolution" has become (by many atheists) an ideological tool and propaganda machine .
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Wakas on July 18, 2014, 04:02:02 AM
peace uq, all,

With regard to mathematical possibility of evolution, I read a journal article which discussed this and suggested it was perfectly feasible. However, a response to that journal article, which also appeared in the journal, discredited much of it.

I have noted that evolutionists tend not to mention the mathematical practicalities/assumptions of their theory, which I have always found disappointing. I'm no expert in biology nor mathematics so I'm not sure what's possible.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Taro Hiroshi on July 18, 2014, 07:14:33 AM
Peace Wakas, all,

Thanks for sharing the findings about the mathematical possibility of evolution. The journal which discussed this and the response to this journal seems interesting. Can you share a link to these articles with with us?

When it comes to my thoughts about the theory of evolution, as far as I am concerned there are many good arguments both for and against this theory. Both those who support the theory of evolution and those who support the theory of intelligent design have good arguments, in my opinion. For example the author Richard Dawkins has some good arguments for evolution, in my opinion. And the author Richard Milton has some good arguments against evolution, in my opinion. Their books/videoes might be worth taking a look at.

There are also people who believe in both evolution and creation. For example the muslim author T.O. Shanavas seems to believe in both evolution and creation. His book "Islamic theory of evolution" might be worth taking a look at.

Many christian creationists claim that the earth is only 6000 years old. But in reality there is no evidence that supports this claim. Since this claim has no basis in reality, I think this claim is worthless.

Many people claim that it is import to read arguments both for and against evolution before making our mind up on the theory of evolution. I think it is important to question both the theory of evolution and the theory of intelligent design. It is not an intelligent decision to blindly accept evolution or blindly accept intelligent design.

A 300 million year old tooth has been found in Russian coal (see the link below). And Nasa images have found a 1.7 million year old man-made bridge (see the link below). If these findings are fantasy-based, then these findings are not a threat to the theory of evolution. But if these findings are factual/reality-based, then these findings suggests that our ape-like ancestors must have been very intelligent and must have been in possession of advanced technology.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/23/300-million-year-old-tooth-gear_n_2527424.html

http://www.industrytap.com/nasa-images-find-1-7-million-year-old-man-made-bridge/17310

Some people claim that either evolutionists are right and intelligent design supporters are wrong, or intelligent supporters are right and evolutionists are wrong. But this might be a false dichotomy. Because there is a possibility that there are more than two options (evolution or creation). There might be a third option as well.   

It seems that most people are either for evolution and against intelligent design, or for intelligent design and against evolution. In the past I used to have a "for-or-against approach" towards the theory of evolution. But then I decided to change my approach and not take a stance regarding this theory until I have examined it more thoroughly. I have decided to not be for or against the theory of evolution until I have studied this theory very deeply and examined the best evidence from both evolutionists and intelligent design supporters. If some evolutionists or some intelligent design supporters consider me a heretic for taking this approach, then so be it. I am not responsible for their petty and useless emotions. I would rather be a critical thinking heretic than a blind following sheep.

Quran 39:18 The ones who listen to what is being said, and then follow the best of it. These are the ones whom God has guided, and these are the ones who possess intelligence.   
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Wakas on July 18, 2014, 07:56:06 AM
peace Taro,

It was this article (http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/12/06/1016207107.abstract). I can't find the response I read, but there are a few responses, e.g.  this one (http://www.bio-complexity.org/ojs/index.php/main/article/view/BIO-C.2012.4/BIO-C.2012.4).
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: BobaFett on July 18, 2014, 11:05:35 PM
Many christian creationists claim that the earth is only 6000 years old. But in reality there is no evidence that supports this claim. Since this claim has no basis in reality, I think this claim is worthless.

While I don't know if there is or is not evidence supporting the 6,000 year  belief, their is certainly strong evidence that the current methods used for dating the age of the Earth are very flawed.

I agree with what you say about evolution vs creation.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: BobaFett on July 18, 2014, 11:31:51 PM
Selam bro.

What I mean by keeping "will of God" out of the equation - is refraining from explicitly mentioning "will of God" in science discourse - I am not meaning forgetting God. God IS always part of the "real" equation - but for the purpose of science we choose to keep this implicit.

I understand what you mean, I just disagree with it for a couple of reasons.

1. While this may be how you look at science, it is certainly not how the majority of modern scientists go about their business. God is not being kept implicit, and this is especially true in Darwinian evolution, God is being excluded.

2. I don't see how keeping God implicit serves science, I have asked you several times to enlighten me on this point.

In study of climatology or astronomy - do we deliberately keep the words "by will of God / by law of God" implicit or not? If you find an honest answer to that you should understand what I am saying.

I don't think you understand what modern science is mate.. The more accurate term is the "Natural sciences". It is the study of the natural world, what we can observe and measure, there is no room in it for the immaterial, the unobservable. Like I said before the will of God is not being kept implicit, it is being excluded. Every modern scientific theory attempts to explain our reality without resorting to the supernatural(God).

The key words are the ones highlighted in red - "physically /mechanically involved". I believe God sustains us somewhat like we sustain our imagination - He is way above physically /mechanically getting involved in this creation.

You are right, I misunderstood this since I took it for granted that we all agree God is immaterial. When you said physically/mechanically involved I thought you meant you didn't believe God was involved with the mechanics of creation. My apologies.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Arman on July 19, 2014, 12:38:44 AM
Salamu Alaika Brother BobaFett.

Alhamdulillah. I am feeling our understandings have now almost perfectly aligned. I agree that many of the (not most) modern scientists not only keep "God's will" explicit - rather they exclude it or believe they have sufficient proof to exclude it. And yes I do agree this is a problem - they themselves are confused and even worse they are spreading this confusion among others. In my view they probably do these because they, too, are confused about the purpose and scope of "materialistic viewpoint". And to address this problem only attacking theory of evolution is not justified - rather we need to have dialogue with the scientists on what science really is and what it is not.

Furthermore - the scientists who exclude God are barely the "most" in number. Even Einstein is known for having faith in a supreme power/entity who controls the universe beyond the understanding and perception of humans. He categorically rejected being termed as Atheist. A survey of scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in May and June 2009, finds that just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher power. (Ref: http://www.pewforum.org/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/). While this % is low compared to faith in general public in the US - it shows it is still premature to say scientists are unanimous in excluding "God". So, how do you think those scientists who do believe in God or a higher authority get along with their day to day business? I believe, like I explained before, they keep the issue of "God's will" implicit in their research - in other words they adopt a "materialistic viewpoint".

I am proposing that a clear understanding of this "materialistic viewpoint" will help us in 2 ways - 1) it will help us to scrutinize theories like evolution from a more objective view point - we will have clear understanding when we are answering the "How" question and when we are answering the "Why" question. and 2) it will help debunk the "myth" that accepting scientific argument and logic automatically renders a person atheist.

May Allah guide us to the straight route.

Regards,
Arman

Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: huruf on July 19, 2014, 01:24:00 AM
From the Qur'an we know that if God didn't exist nothing would exist the creation would cease to exist and that if God did not sustain his cretation it would cease to exist, nothing would exist. But God has made his creation with his sunna, his laws. It is a creation in which is imprinted God's "talents" his way of doing things. We are marked by our creator, we cannot behave, nothing can behave in non conformity with Gods imprinted laws. Law of selfpreservation, for instance.

Any evolution has to be according to God laws. We do not need to state everytime this is according to God's laws. Like I do not have to say everytime I talk to my mother in the presence of those who know her, this is my mother, because that is not the question. The question may be is what is this law or this mechanism that makes things happen this way and not another way? Evolution exists, that is, as far as I can judge, a certainty.

BUT what kind of evolution is it? how does it operate? Trhough randomness? As far as I can  judge that is not nonsense, no that is nothing. It does not teach us anything or reveal anything. Randomness does nto exist as a cause of anything. Randomness is another way of saying "I do not know". When people do not know how something came to happen, they say hasard, randomness, destiny, whatever. That is their state of mind or their perplexity, but it does not explain anything. It is the same thing with "natural selection", before that called "survival of the fittest". It has been a cosmetic improvement of vocabulary. "The fittest" smacked of not very charitable consideration of the weakest. So the terms were made less "inocuous, but the fact is that again, natural selection, rests a lot on randomness, that is on ignorance. The fact that you name something instead of ignorance something else, does not make you less ignorant.

Darwinian evolution fell most soundly with the discovery of genetics by Mendel. It was subsequently rearranged to fit genetics in the equation, but is is still upholding something of mystical Choiceness so, so much akin to the "chosen" people concept. That is as if nature selected the surviving ones over the non surviving ones. That you say that "God who selects" or that it "nature selects", the blank is knowledge is the same but you introduce a "moral" or existential principle of things that exist beause they have been chosen by... Call it whatever, you are already setting ategories of things, of people by way of attributing to them the merits of having been chosen. That science is rotten science, sloppy rotten science that rests on the root idea of some being discarded of higher authority and others being chosen of higher authority, and of course that whole concept managed by the gurus of "selection".

Science is inert, it is not a being, it is a concept, and that concept is never independent of the basic mentality that takes hold of it. And when the basic mentality is the one basec on the survival of the fittest (the most powerful) it is lasted and cannot be very objective.

A scientist as anybody who undertakes a labour in which he or she will put all their strengths and endeavours, must purify her or himself. Thy cannot go into it burdened by all the preconceptions, prejudices, and "battles". Scientifical battles are nto nbattles of science but of things straneous to it.

Of course, for as long as we are human we will not be 100% but we should strive for it. If from the start we are already committed to an idea or an ideollogy and connot make it an outside element while we are engaged inside the scientific question, then no good science will come of it.

Darwin is in everybody's mouth. Mendel who did a real discovery far worthier than Darwin's (who as far as I know did not discover anything that wasn't discovered before him) is not mentionned even one tenth of the times Darwin's is mentionned. Why is that? Of course no injustice to Mendel, those who know know who he is and it is sure he didn't discover anything seeking glory or popularity, but it does show where we are concenring science and how we make of it a battleground, where it should be an exsercise in humility and perseverance. Of course with big monies in the strife, things are likely to worsen and not to improve.

Salaam
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Man of Faith on July 19, 2014, 03:34:02 AM
Peace,

I think no intelligent person would reject the notion that there is a creator to all this. Einsten was a person who delved into his own mind quite much and philosophized upon things.

The problem is that it is the clergy that causes people to discard established faith because they give such a pathetic impression with rituals and stuff. It is the lesser intelligent people who often mess with religion and turn it into something reminding more of Pagan worship.

They may know about academic and sophisticated methods, but what makes one truly intelligent is the ability to think "outside the box". If you use the brain only to store what others indoctrinate you to know of knowledge then it will avail you nothing in terms of intelligence.

I suppose Einstein refrained from affiliate himself with any of the sects because he was simply too intelligent to see any of them as right. Because none of them are right not even today 2014.

But on a bottom line; I cannot speak more for Einstein because I did not know him or what went on in his mind and the judgment rests with God. If he had faith in the creator entity and kept himself from bad deeds he may have stood a chance.

Have faith
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Jafar on July 19, 2014, 04:45:48 AM
The problem is that it is the clergy that causes people to discard established faith because they give such a pathetic impression with rituals and stuff. It is the lesser intelligent people who often mess with religion and turn it into something reminding more of Pagan worship.

The religion of Paganism (Arabic paganism, Greek paganism, Roman paganism, Canaan paganism etc..)
consists of 100% rites and 0% morality code.

Spiritualism & Philosophical & Social welfare / justice movement (e.g. Buddhism, Taoism, Abolitionism) consists of 100% morality code and 0% rites.

In between there are; Ancient Egyptianism, Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Christianism, Islamism, Hinduism which contains a mixed of morality and rites.

However... from the Tanakh, unlike paganistic gods, YHVH loves justice and good deeds much more than ritual observance..

"To do what is right and just is more acceptable to YHVH than sacrifice."
Proverbs 21:3

"When you spread out your hands in prayer, I hide my eyes from you; even when you offer many prayers, I am not listening. Your hands are full of blood! Wash and make yourselves clean. Take your evil deeds out of my sight; stop doing wrong. Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow."
Isaiah 1:16


Quote
I suppose Einstein refrained from affiliate himself with any of the sects because he was simply too intelligent to see any of them as right. Because none of them are right not even today 2014.

Einstein is not religious and/or a holy-bookist.. or in other words, he didn't idolized any books.
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me to) change this."
-- A. Einstein

Definitely he's an infidel of Judaism:
"For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions, And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people. "As far as my experience goes, they are no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them."
-- A. Einstein

Yet he's still believe in a God, although it's not a 'personal God'.

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. Scientific research can reduce superstition by encouraging people to think and view things in terms of cause and effect. Certain it is that a conviction, akin to religious feeling, of the rationality and intelligibility of the world lies behind all scientific work of a higher order... This firm belief, a belief bound up with a deep feeling, in a superior mind that reveals itself in the world of experience, represents my conception of God."
-- A. Einstein

And similar to Abe Lincoln, he's a determinist..
?God does not play dice with the universe.?
"You believe in a God who plays dice, and I in complete law and order in a world which objectively exists, and which I in a wildly speculative way, am trying to capture. I firmly believe, but I hope that someone will discover a more realistic way, or rather a more tangible basis than it has been my lot to find. Even the great initial success of the quantum theory does not make me believe in the fundamental dice game, although I am well aware that some of our younger colleagues interpret this as a consequence of senility."

-- A. Einstein

And he believes a 'dogmatic organized religion, instilling a set of belief through force' will soon face it's demise.
"In my opinion, an autocratic system of coercion soon degenerates; force attracts men of low morality"
-- A. Einstein

In summary this is his religion, upholding morality as the highest priority, following what YHVH has ordered:
My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance ? but for us, not for God.
-- A. Einstein

I shared many common views with Einstein, not because "Einstein did said so", but my own summary based on my own observations 'coincidentally' inline with his view.

Salam / Peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Man of Faith on July 19, 2014, 06:35:51 AM
Peace Jafar,

But what remains of the teaching (torah), Gospel or a book called Quran in themselves teach no rituals. It is the sects evolving from interpreting them who have made the rituals and attributing them to God and said "God told us to do so"

The book called Quran is a very different book if you put yourself into it beneath all that crap they assign to the words. You can write a book in elaboration to what they say about the trilateral s - l - w despite it being an innocent word that cannot imply too much on its own.

Have faith

Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Taro Hiroshi on July 19, 2014, 08:09:42 AM
It was this article (http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/12/06/1016207107.abstract). I can't find the response I read, but there are a few responses, e.g.  this one (http://www.bio-complexity.org/ojs/index.php/main/article/view/BIO-C.2012.4/BIO-C.2012.4).

Thanks for sharing the links.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Jafar on July 19, 2014, 11:00:41 PM
But what remains of the teaching (torah), Gospel or a book called Quran in themselves teach no rituals. It is the sects evolving from interpreting them who have made the rituals and attributing them to God and said "God told us to do so"

All of the 'verse injection' in all those books usually related to either 'rituals' or 'sanctuary/relics/people worshiping'. (e.g. temple in mount Girzim, temple in Jerusalem, temple in Mecca).
All were being put there in the books by the 'priestly' class.
It's an endeavor for them to 'stay relevant', to 'stay in power'.
Because without any rituals, there will not be any religion.
And without any religion there will not be any priest.

Having said that, all of the rites it self is not necessarily bad.
The priests have to earn some living somehow right?
As long as it doesn't violate any morality code... such as...

"'The people of Judah have done evil in my eyes, declares YHVH. They have set up their detestable things in the house that bears my Name and have defiled it. They have built the high places of Topheth in the Valley of Hinnom in order to burn their sons and daughters in the fire, a thing I did not command; I never entertained the thought."
-- Book of Jeremiah 7:30







Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Taro Hiroshi on December 22, 2015, 04:54:52 PM
Peace BobaFett and everyone,

This is why all these multiverse theories are popping up, even with the vastness of our universe it is extremely unlikely for life to come about in this manner, so now they say "well there could be an infinite amount of universes and our universe is one of the few(perhaps only) with life."

From my understanding of the Quran, it disproves the notion of separate universes (e.g. multiverse theories). Even if there are several/many universes, I think that they are all part of one vast and interdependent/interconnected creation. Because the God is the creator of everything (see verse 6:102). And since there is only one God, all creation seems to be part of a unified whole/oneness. Therefore it appears that separateness is an illusion.

In verse 13:16, the Quran suggests that there is only one creation (a unified whole). And in verse 13:16,  the Quran seems to disprove the notion of several/many separate universes (e.g. multiverse theories).

Quran 13:16 Say: "Who is the Lord of the heavens and the earth?" Say: "God." Say: "Have you taken besides Him allies who do not possess for themselves any benefit or harm?" Say: "Is the blind and the seer the same? Or do the darkness and the light equate? Or have they set up partners with God who have created like His creation, so the creations all seemed the same to them?" Say: "God has created all things, and He is the One, the Supreme."
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Sanjan Ali Hazarika on January 21, 2016, 06:50:35 AM
The genetic similarities found between human being, chimpanzees and gorillas forced the scientists to believe that human being originated from chimps. Accordingly scientists and anthropologists put forward the theory of evolution. Recently by examining the fossils found in Africa, scientists recognize 15-20 different such species which are believed to be ancestors of early human. But scientists debate over how to identify and classify particular species of early human. Latest findings contradict the theory of evolution and indicate that human being originated from a single source.   
There are millions of species of living beings under water and over surface. The theory which accounts for origin of human being, should also be responsible to explain the origin of all other living beings.
Now let us examine some of the facts on the basis of human observations. We have record of observations of at least last two thousand years. There is no record of any intellectual or structural change in any of the species of the animal kingdom. Had this evolution theory been possible we would have certainly observed some changes structural or genetic in some of the species in the last 2000 years.  There is no record of any habitual change in any of the advanced species.
Most current studies with strong scientific evidences differ from the above evolution theory. Genetic and archeological evidences do not support the Darwinian theory. These evidences predict that human being originated from a single source and the place of origin was east Africa with first migration out of Africa taking place around 60,000 years ago.
?And Allah has created every animal from water of them there are some that creep on their bellies; some that walk on two legs; and some that walk on four.  Allah creates what He wills; for verily Allah has power over all things?. [Al Nur:45](Trans A. Yusuf Ali)]
O mankind! reverence your Guardian-Lord, who created you from a single person, created, of like nature, His mate, and from them twain scattered (like seeds) countless men and women;- reverence Allah, through whom ye demand your mutual (rights), and (reverence) the wombs (That bore you): for Allah ever watches over you.[ Al Nisa?: 01(Trans. A. Yusuf Ali)]
The Quran also predicts the origin of human being from a single source. Moreover The Quran clearly states that before the creation of human being on earth, vegetation, water - air and all other  necessary environment was created. The Quranic statement about the origin of living beings on earth is complete compared to all other religious scriptures.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Student of Allah on February 03, 2016, 01:08:24 PM
Shalom Aleikhem,

The genetic similarities found between human being, chimpanzees and gorillas forced the scientists to believe that human being originated from chimps. .........................................................

That's not true. Evolutionary biologists don't believe that we evolved from chimps. Both Chimps and Human beings evolved from common ancestor which is very different from saying that we evolved from them. Much like you and your cousin descended from common forefathers, that is not to say that you came from your cousin.

As for the rest of your post:

What you are saying isn't what the scientific community is saying. You seem to be making stuff up! We do not have genetic basis for the conclusion that the Darwinian theory is correct??????? Are you kidding me? Here is something from Francis Collin (administrator of the Human Genome Project):

Quote

As someone who's had the privilege of leading the human genome project, I've had the opportunity to study our own DNA instruction book at a level of detail that was never really possible before. It's also now been possible to compare our DNA with that of many other species. The evidence supporting the idea that all living things are descended from a common ancestor is truly overwhelming. I would not necessarily wish that to be so, as a Bible-believing Christian. But it is so. It does not serve faith well to try to deny that.
"God Is Not Threatened by Our Scientific Adventures (http://www.beliefnet.com/News/Science-Religion/2006/08/God-Is-Not-Threatened-By-Our-Scientific-Adventures.aspx)", interview by Laura Sheahen, Beliefnet (undated)

Yes, evolution by descent from a common ancestor is clearly true. If there was any lingering doubt about the evidence from the fossil record, the study of DNA provides the strongest possible proof of our relatedness to all other living things.
"Collins: Why this scientist believes in God (http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/03/collins.commentary/index.html)", editorial, CNN (April 6, 2007)



Archaeological evidences refute evolution?

Apes - humans

Ardipithecus ramidus ~4.4 million years ago

Ardipithecus ramidus had a brain the size of a chimp's, but probably walked upright on the ground, while still able to go on all fours in the trees, where it would find its opposable big toe useful (Gibbons, 2009).

Australopithecus afarensis ~3.6 mya

Australopithecus afarensis was a more advanced walker, with nongrasping feet (White et al, 2009), but it still had the brain size of a chimpanzee (Dawkins, 2009). Probably not a direct ancestor of modern humans (Rak et al, 2007).
Australopithecus africanus ~3 mya

Similar.
Homo habilis ~2 mya?
Homo habilis had a brain about 50% bigger than a chimp's. The fossils are found with a variety of stone tools; this is the earliest human which we're sure used tools (Coyne, 2009).

Homo erectus ~1 mya
A tool-maker, Homo erectus had a brain size of about 1,000 cc, still smaller than our own (Dawkins, 2009).

Homo heidelbergensis ~0.5 mya
Homo heidelbergensis had a brain size approaching our own, and shows a mix of Homo erectus and modern human features (Coyne, 2009).

Fish - Tetrapods

Eusthenopteron ~385 million years ago
A pelagic fish, Eusthenopteron is probably representative of the group from which tetrapods evolved. It had a tetrapod-like skull and spine (Prothero, 2007).

Panderichthys ~385 mya
Panderichthys had a tetrapod-like braincase and tetrapod-like teeth, and had also lost its dorsal and anal fins (Prothero, 2007).

Tiktaalik ~375 mya
Though still a water-dweller, Tiktaalik had fins that were halfway towards being feet, and ears capable of hearing in air or water (Prothero, 2007). It was capable of crawling around in very shallow water, and it had a neck, unlike fish but like tetrapods (Coyne, 2009).

Ventastega ~365 mya
The bones of Ventastega are intermediate between Tiktaalik and Acanthostega (Ahlberg et al, 2008). Sadly, the fossil is incomplete and we can't see its fins/feet.

Acanthostega ~365 mya
Possessing four definite legs, Acanthostega was presumably capable of movement over land (Coyne, 2009), though the legs were still better suited for crawling along the bottom of the water (Prothero, 2007). Its tail was still adapted for propulsion through water, and it still had gills (Ridley, 2004).

Ichthyostega ~365 mya
Slightly more like a land animal, Ichthyostega had powerful shoulders implying it did indeed use its legs to move over land, at least sometimes (Clack, 2005). Even now, the skull still closely resembled that of Eusthenopteron (Futuyma, 2005).

Pederpes ~350 mya
The foot of Pederpes "has characteristics that distinguish it from the paddle-like feet of the Devonian forms [i.e. the above animals] and resembles the feet of later, more terrestrially adapted Carboniferous forms" (Clack, 2002).

Dinosaurs - birds

Anchiornis ~155 million years ago
Although many feathered dinosaurs are known, Anchiornis is the first to be found that probably predates Archaeopteryx. The feathers were "not obviously flight-adapted" (Hu et al, 2009).

Archaeopteryx ~145 mya
The famous Archaeopteryx had feathers and was probably capable of at least gliding, but it also had dinosaur-like teeth, claws, and a long bony tail. Its skeleton was "almost identical to that of some theropod dinosaurs" (Coyne, 2009). Precisely how closely related it is to the main line of bird evolution remains the subject of controversy (Xu et al, 2011).

Confuciusornis ~125 mya
Confuciusornis had a bird-like tail and a pygostyle, which is a feature of modern birds. It retained dinosaur-like claws (Prothero, 2007). It had strong shoulder bones, but was probably not capable of true flapping flight (Senter, 2006). It may have glided. It is the earliest known bird with a toothless beak, but other lineages continued to have teeth for a long time.

Sinornis ~110 mya?
Sinornis "still had teeth, an unfused tarsometatarsus, and an unfused pelvis" (Prothero, 2007) but resembled modern birds in other ways, with reduced vertebrae, a flexible wishbone, a shoulder joint adapted for flying, and hand bones fused into a carpometacarpus (Prothero, 2007).

Vorona ~80 mya?
The legs of Vorona are all that we have (Benton, 2005), but they show a combination of bird characteristics and maniraptoran (dinosaur) characteristics (Forster et al, 1996).

Ichthyornis ~80 mya
A strong flyer, Ichthyornis was very nearly a modern bird (Prothero, 2007), and yet it still had teeth.

Synapsids - mammals

Archaeothyris ~305 million years ago
Mostly lizard-like. However Archaeothyris is one of the earliest known synapsids; a group defined by possession of a single temporal fenestra (Ridley, 2004).

Dimetrodon ~280 mya
Dimetrodon had specialised canine teeth (Prothero, 2008) akin to those of modern mammals.

Lycaenops ~260 mya
More mammal-like, especially in how it held its limbs: closer to its body like modern mammals, rather than sprawled to the side like Dimetrodon (Prothero, 2007). It still had a great many "primitive" features, such as ribs in the lumbar area (Prothero, 2007).

Thrinaxodon ~245 mya
Had the beginning of a secondary palate in its skull (Prothero, 2007); in modern mammals, this allows eating and breathing at the same time, and is a sign of a more active lifestyle (Ridley, 2004). Its more advanced skull also allowed it to chew its food; and indeed it had premolars and molars with which to do so (Prothero, 2007). The skeleton was not yet fully mammal-like, but it had lost those lumbar ribs.

Probainognathus ~225 mya?
Probainognathus still possessed a reptile-like jaw articulation (Macdonald et al 2009) but also had "the initiation of the articulation which was later to become the more highly developed glenoid-condyle articulation of the mammal" (Romer, 1969). It had a well developed zygomatic arch (Macdonald et al 2009). However, its braincase was very unlike that of modern mammals (Romer, 1969).

Diarthrognathus ~210 mya?
The fascinating Diarthrognathus had a jaw that contained both the old reptile-like joint as well as the new mammalian joint (Prothero, 2007).

Land mammals - Whales and dolphins

Indohyus ~48 million years ago
Although only a cousin species of the ancestor of whales, Indohyus had bones denser than normal mammals, indicating it was partially aquatic: heavy bones are good ballast (Thewissen et al, 2009). Its ears shared a feature with modern whales: a thickened wall of bone which assists in underwater hearing; non-cetaceans don't have this (Thewissen et al, 2009).

Pakicetus ~52 mya
Perhaps the actual ancestor, Pakicetus was probably semi-aquatic; like Indohyus, it had dense bones for ballast (Thewissen et al, 2009). Its body was "wolf-like" but the skull had eye sockets adapted for looking upwards, presumably at objects floating above it (Thewissen et al, 2009). Although initially known from just a skull, many more bones were found later (Thewissen et al, 2001).

Ambulocetus ~50 mya
With a streamlined, elongated skull and reduced limbs, Ambulocetus probably spent most of its time in shallow water. Its reduced limbs meant it could only waddle on land (Coyne, 2009). It resembled a crocodile in some ways.

Rodhocetus ~45 mya
The nostrils of Rodhocetus have started to move backwards (towards the blowhole position) and the skeleton indicates a much stronger swimmer (Coyne, 2009). On land it would struggle, moving "somewhat like a modern eared seal or sea lion" (Gingerich et al, 2001). Its teeth were simpler than its predecessors (Futuyma, 2005), a trend that continued to the present.

Maiacetus ~47 mya
Seems similar to Rodhocetus. One fossil was found with what appeared to be a foetus, in a position indicating head-first birth (Gingerich et al, 2009) unlike modern whales. However this is disputed; the "foetus" might just be a partially digested meal (Thewissen and McLellan, 2009).

Basilosaurus ~40 mya
The whale-like, fully aquatic Basilosaurus had almost lost its (tiny) hindlimbs, but they had not yet vanished entirely (Prothero, 2007).

Dorudon ~40 mya
Also fully aquatic, Dorudon also had tiny hind limbs, which "barely projected from the body" (Futuyma, 2005).

Aetiocetus ~25 mya
The blowhole in Aetiocetus is about halfway to its position in modern whales on top of the head. Aetiocetus also represents the transition from toothed whales to the filter-feeding baleen whales, being similar to baleen whales in most respects, but possessing teeth (Van Valen, 1968).

Protohorse - Horses

Hyracotherium ~60 million years ago
A cousin species of the ancestor of horses. The forelimb of Hyracotherium had four toes (Raven et al, 2008).

Protorohippus ~50 mya
Bigger. The forelimb had four toes.

Mesohippus ~35 mya
Bigger. The forelimb had three toes (Raven et al, 2008).

Miohippus ~35 mya
The skull and snout of Miohippus are becoming more horse-like (Prothero, 2007).

Parahippus ~23 mya
The skeleton of Parahippus was more adapted to long-distance running, for escaping predators in an open environment (Evans, 1992). About this time, grasslands were becoming common in North America, where horses evolved (Raven et al, 2008). They would later die out in America (Dawkins, 2009).

Merychippus ~17 mya
With bigger teeth, Merychippus was more adapted to the grazing lifestyle of modern horses. Earlier species were likely browsers that ate leaves, but Merychippus could also eat grass (Raven et al, 2008).

Pliohippus ~12 mya
Pliohippus still had three toes, but only the central toe touched the ground; the others being too small. This was probably not a direct ancestor of modern horses.

Dinohippus ~5 mya
Some specimens of Dinohippus have three toes; but some have one, like modern horses (Florida Museum of Natural History).

Miscellaneous

Aardonyx, a proto-sauropod dinosaur that, though bipedal, could probably also walk on all fours (Yates et al, 2009). Contrary to what you might expect, in this case bipeds evolved to become quadrupeds.

Amphistium, an early flatfish, with eyes intermediate in position between an ordinary fish and a modern flatfish (Friedman, 2008).

Claudiosaurus, an early relative of marine reptiles like plesiosaurs, but the limbs are not very specialised for swimming (Prothero, 2007).

Darwinopterus, a pterosaur, has the advanced skull and neck of the Pterodactyloidea group, but other traits (e.g. its long tail) are like the primitive Rhamphorhynchoid group (Lu et al, 2009).

Enaliarctos, an early seal, but with more primitive skull and feet (Prothero, 2007).

Eocaecilia, an early caecilian, but with limbs (Jenkins and Walsh, 1993).

Gerobatrachus, a transitional fossil between frogs and salamanders (Anderson et al, 2008).

Haikouella, perhaps the earliest known chordate (Coyne, 2009).

Najash, an early snake. Had two hind limbs (Apesteguia and Hussam, 2006).

Odontochelys, an early turtle with "half a shell" and a long tail (Dawkins, 2009).

Pezosiren, an early manatee, but with legs rather than flippers (Prothero, 2007).

Protosuchus, a crocodile precursor but "smaller and much more lightly built" than modern crocodiles (Prothero, 2007).

Seymouria, a "mosaic of primitive tetrapod [i.e. amphibian] and advanced amniote [i.e. reptile] characters" (Prothero, 2007).

Sphecomyrma, an early ant, with primitive features (Coyne, 2009).

Triadobatrachus, an early frog, but with more vertebrae, and possessing ribs, which modern frogs don't have (Benton, 2005).


List of relevant publications (to study the academic literature on the listed fossils):

Ahlberg PE, Clack JA, Luksevics E, Blom H, Zupins I (2008) Ventastega curonica and the origin of tetrapod morphology. Nature 453(7199): 1199?1204.

Anderson JS, Reisz RR, Scott D, Frobisch NB, Sumida SS (2008) A stem batrachian from the Early Permian of Texas and the origin of frogs and salamanders. Nature 453(7194): 515-518.

Apesteguia S, Hussam Z (2006) A Cretaceous terrestrial snake with robust hindlimbs and a sacrum. Nature 440(7087): 1037-1040 .

Benton MJ (2005) Vertebrate Palaeontology, 3rd edition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Clack JA (2002) An early tetrapod from 'Romer's Gap'. Nature 418(6893): 72-76 .

Clack JA (2005) Getting a Leg Up on Land. Scientific American 293(6): 100-107.

Coyne JA (2009) Why Evolution is True. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dawkins R (2009) The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution. London: Bantam Press.

Evans WE (1992) Horse Breeding and Management. New York: Elsevier Science.

Florida Museum of Natural History (date unknown) Dinohippus.

Forster CA, Chiappe LM, Krause DW, Sampson SD (1996) The first Cretaceous bird from Madagascar. Nature 382(6591): 532-534.

Friedman M (2008) The evolutionary origin of flatfish asymmetry. Nature 454(7201): 209-212 .

Futuyma DJ (2005) Evolution. Sunderland: Sinauer.

Gibbons A (2009) A New Kind of Ancestor: Ardipithecus Unveiled. Science 326(5949): 36-40.

Gingerich PD, Arif M, Clyde WC (1995) New Archaeocetes (Mammalia, Cetacea) from the Middle Eocene Domanda formation of the Sulaiman range, Pun Jab (Pakistan). Contributions from the Museum of Paleontology, The University of Michigan 29(11): 291-330.

Gingerich PD, Ul-Haq M, Zalmout IS, Khan IH, Malkani MS (2001) Origin of Whales from Early Artiodactyls: Hands and Feet of Eocene Protocetidae from Pakistan. Science 293(5538): 2239-2242.

Gingerich PD, Ul-Haq M, Von Koenigswald W, Sanders WJ, Smith BH, Zalmout IS (2009) New Protocetid Whale from the Middle Eocene of Pakistan: Birth on Land, Precocial Development, and Sexual Dimorphism. PLoS ONE 4(2): e4366.

Hu D, Hou L, Zhang L, Xu X (2009) A pre-Archaeopteryx troodontid theropod from China with long feathers on the metatarsus. Nature 461(7264): 640-643 .

Jenkins FA, Walsh DM (1993) An Early Jurassic caecilian with limbs. Nature 365(6443): 246-250 .

Lu J, Unwin DM, Jin X, Liu Y, Ji Q (2009) Evidence for modular evolution in a long-tailed pterosaur with a pterodactyloid skull. Proceedings of the Royal Society B.

Macdonald DW (ed.) (2009) The Encyclopedia of Mammals, 3rd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

MacFadden BJ (1986) Fossil Horses from "Eohippus" (Hyracotherium) to Equus: Scaling, Cope's Law, and the Evolution of Body Size. Paleobiology 12(4): 355-369.

Niedzwiedzki G, Szrek P, Narkiewicz K, Narkiewicz M, Ahlberg PE (2010) Tetrapod trackways from the early Middle Devonian period of Poland. Nature 463(7277): 43-48.

Prothero DR (2007) Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters. New York: Columbia University Press.
Prothero DR (2008) What missing link? New Scientist 197(2645): 35-41.

Rak Y, Ginzburg A, Geffen E (2007) Gorilla-like anatomy on Australopithecus afarensis mandibles suggests Au. afarensis link to robust australopiths. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104(16): 6568-6572.

Raven PH, Johnson GB, Losos JB, Mason KA, Singer SR (2008) Biology, 8th edition. New York: McGraw Hill.

Ridley M (2004) Evolution, 3rd edition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Romer AS (1969) Cynodont Reptile with Incipient Mammalian Jaw Articulation. Science 166(3907): 881-882 .

Senter P (2006) Scapular orientation in theropods and basal birds, and the origin of flapping flight. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 51(2): 305-313.

Thewissen JGM, Williams EM, Roe LJ, Hussain ST (2001) Skeletons of terrestrial cetaceans and the relationship of whales to artiodactyls. Nature 413(6853): 277-281.

Thewissen JGM, Cooper LN, George JC, Bajpai S (2009) From Land to Water: the Origin of Whales, Dolphins, and Porpoises. Evo Edu Outreach 2(2): 272-288.

Thewissen JGM, McLellan WA (2009) Maiacetus: displaced fetus or last meal? PLoS ONE.

Van Valen L (1968) Monophyly or Diphyly in the Origin of Whales. Evolution 22(1): 37-41.

White TD, Asfaw B, Beyene Y, Haile-Selassie Y, Lovejoy CO, Suwa G, WoldeGabriel G (2009) Ardipithecus ramidus and the Paleobiology of Early Hominids. Science 326(5949): 75-86.

Xu X, You H, Du K Han F (2011) An Archaeopteryx-like theropod from China and the origin of Avialae. Nature 475: 465-470.

Yates AM, Bonnan MF, Neveling J, Anusuya C, Blackbeard MG (2009) A new transitional sauropodomorph dinosaur from the Early Jurassic of South Africa and the evolution of sauropod feeding and quadrupedalism. Proceedings of the Royal Society B.

Zimmer C (1998) At the Water's Edge: Macroevolution and the Transformation of Life. New York: Free Press.


As we clearly see, the works of the experts in the field have validated and confirmed the theory of evolution. We found these fossils where the theory predicted them to be found. I have no idea why creationists still act like we haven't found anything. For the love of God!! This list of transitional fossils isn't even an exhaustive one. Yet, its enough to utterly destroy the claims of the creationists that only survive if taken on faith, not evidence.

The gene pool of ANY population on this planet is changing with every damn generation! How on earth did you conclude that nobody observed that in the last 2000 years? That is one of the most preposterous things I've ever heard. Or were you looking for some extreme changes like a group of us evolving wings? Given the time scale evolution works with, which can be billions of years, how would you expect to see dramatic changes in such a short span of time? The fact that the genetic codes are changing is the evidence that everything is changing. Just do some simple math and calculate the percentage difference over hundreds of millions of years and you'll know what I'm talking about.


Peace
------------ Student of Allah
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Study on February 08, 2016, 06:04:00 PM
I believe in Evolution.

One reason why is because of our sexual behaviour.
Why are we so focused on the glutes?
We almost mystify a body part that consists only of muscles.
At least when talking about it physiologically. Honestly the bottom of a person is just a "part" of their body, what makes us humans think of it as something so special and significant that we get aroused by it up to the point of wanting to mate?

I believe this has a whole lot to do with evolution. When thinking about the function of the Gluteus (maximus) it is to push the pelvic forward. Resulting in an upright posture. We humans at a certain time of evolution had the desire to stand up straight and that's probably why we decided to mate with partners who had a well formed/sized bottom.
Of course one could also argue that this "desire" to mate with people with a well-formed bottom was installed into our brains through a higher force.
This is not all too different from natural selection, mating partners found big gluted males/females more attractive, resulting into them getting more offspring.

If you take a look at chimpanzees for example, they most of the time sit in a squat alike position.
Our ancestors must have had a similair posture.

Standing straight might have had multiple advantages, two of them being.
Becoming a long time sprinter. Hunting gets easier.
Free hands, as they don't carry our body, we can start carrying objects in a better way.

The myth of wider hips meaning that women are more fertile and can give better birth is in my opinion rubbish, and I don't see how that can be scientifically backed up.
But since I've criticized it now, I'll make sure to give this perspective/idea a change and spend some time researching on "how" this could be possibly correct.


Of course all of this may be wrong as they are simply my opinion.
peace. :peace:
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: uq on February 09, 2016, 10:54:46 PM
Peace Study,

Thank you for your post, it was interesting to read your thoughts.

We must remember that procreational urges are a composite of many different biochemical and psychological factors. It would be an overtly simplified proposition to state that procreational urges in men rest solely on the shape of a woman's posterior. Furthermore, notwithstanding our male-dominated social structure, would it be right to say that female humans are propelled into procreational urges on account of the shape of a male's posterior?

We must also remember that the shape of a woman's posterior as a desirable feature of her body, can be, in many cases, a social construct. There is no evidence to suggest that there exists a code of DNA in our genome which causes all human beings in all cultures to respond sexually to the shape of a woman's posterior. In Medieval Europe, women with a plump frame were considered to be the highest ideal of beauty, whereas, in today's Western culture, women with a slender frame are considered to be so. Beauty and desirability are subjective.

Finally, we must also remember that explaining human procreational urges in biochemical and psychological terms makes sense only when we are talking about humans in their early stages of development. However, today's humans are less-governed by primal instincts, and we are more-able to override those urges because of the influence of social norms and practices. I'm sure most people will agree that we now place a greater emphasis on social and behavioural factors when seeking a mate, such as a person's character, their compatibility, their position in social hierarchy, etc. That's not to say that we completely overlook our ideas of physical beauty, but that it is no longer the sole determinant in procreational behaviour.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: hanslan on February 10, 2016, 12:02:56 AM
Peace, nobody knows how Allah creates.  We all have our hypothesis and speculation, we are limited by our faculties, we don't even know what makes atoms cling to one another.

In the end the answer may just be an instruction from Allah "BE" and thus creation!   

Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: huruf on February 10, 2016, 01:58:39 AM
I find very impressive the ayas that say that he creteeed His creation bilHaqq, with truth, and also not as a play or playing.

Salaam
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Study on February 12, 2016, 07:29:09 PM
Peace, nobody knows how Allah creates.  We all have our hypothesis and speculation, we are limited by our faculties, we don't even know what makes atoms cling to one another.
But of course, however that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to understand. I think God created human beings in order for us to think for ourselves, hence, try and find a solution to all we can. Having "God knows best" as an answer is very unscientific.

I have never read a scholarly work in which a theory is claimed to be correct. Such claims often come from unscientific reports.

Peace Study,

Thank you for your post, it was interesting to read your thoughts.
Peace uq,

why, thank you.

We must remember that procreational urges are a composite of many different biochemical and psychological factors. It would be an overtly simplified proposition to state that procreational urges in men rest solely on the shape of a woman's posterior.
I agree that our sexual desires are influenced by many a things.
I never meant to imply that the glutes are the only factor. However, I do consider it to be the most significant aspect in regard to (sexual) stimuli.
It's not simply male interest in female glutes.
But also female interest in male glutes. Although I believe this desire to be often left secret.
I totally agree on cultural influence in regard to how our expectations/desires form. For example the idea of a man having big powerfull glutes is considered weird.
What's actually weird though, is that such a crucial muscle (let alone for the sake of health) is expected to stay small in men, and the rest of their body is expected to be muscular.
I could even imagine that culture plays a role in not letting women understand their own desire in physique in which men have powerfull glutes. This idea stems from me having read many comments regarding how women do NOT want their partners to have big glutes, although inbetween these comments were many women who expressed a desire for men with big glutes. (a very subjective hypothesis for which I have absolutely zero reliability or validity)


Furthermore, notwithstanding our male-dominated social structure, would it be right to say that female humans are propelled into procreational urges on account of the shape of a male's posterior?
The selection of partners from a female point of view is much more complex than vice-versa.
Not only today (which is not all too different from how it used to be in a natural environment) but all throughout the existence of humankind.
This is actually a field which's being highly researched https://scholar.google.de/scholar?q=female+partner+selection&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwil_uOSyvPKAhXwbZoKHXwQAbAQgQMIHTAA

Most powerfull arguments in my opinion are
"The willingness and ability of a man to provide for a woman and her children."
Nowadays that means being rich.
"The willingness and ability of a man to protect a woman and her children."
Nowadays that means being rich.
"The willingness and ability of a man to engage in direct parenting activities such as teaching, nurturing and providing social support and opportunities."
https://books.google.de/books?hl=en&lr=&id=SxX4gRzOS6oC&oi=fnd&pg=PA267&dq=female+partner+selection+evolution&ots=Bh2q4D2LxN&sig=N_mVNTwNKemQshk8eHBBxseglFk#v=onepage&q=female%20partner%20selection%20evolution&f=false

It's often been argued that the selection of men and women are different.
Men are more physical, they want flesh.
Women have developed a more empathical mind in order to understand what men are going to be like after marriage, they're more complex.
This doesn't mean that a men can not be empathical, nor does it mean that women don't have a desire for well build men.

We must also remember that the shape of a woman's posterior as a desirable feature of her body, can be, in many cases, a social construct. There is no evidence to suggest that there exists a code of DNA in our genome which causes all human beings in all cultures to respond sexually to the shape of a woman's posterior. In Medieval Europe, women with a plump frame were considered to be the highest ideal of beauty, whereas, in today's Western culture, women with a slender frame are considered to be so. Beauty and desirability are subjective.
Most of the DNA is left unexplained.
Junk DNA is most likely not Junk DNA. Meaning that over 85% of our DNA is unknown.
And let's be fair, I've never heard of DNA sequences explaining human behaviour, have you?


The sole reason why females have bigger buttocks (not saying glutes(=muscle)) is because of estrogen. Estrogen causes fat to be stored in the buttocks, hips and thighs.
Throughout the later stages of evolution of humankind there have probably been more women than men, reasons why:
Health complications are more likey to occur in male babies.
Men were hunters, them dying was a more likely thing to happen.
Which means that men could choose which women they wanted to mate with. Bigger rivalry between women then there is today.
If I have been correct in my statements before than that would make it very likely that women with bigger buttocks to have been the winners, in the sense of them being the one who had gotten children who were raised/nurtured/taught by their fathers, or simply, survived so that they too (with their big bottoms) could reproduce.

Plump women have big buttocks as well.
This argument does not deny what I said. On the contrary (Estrogen), the "attractive" areas will look even bigger.
All throughout history women with big buttocks were considered attractive. Oldest known statue Venus of Willendorf, https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-zfF5rtsq4JA/TXhn7ZWjK6I/AAAAAAAAAX8/g9zMkGc2Q_w/s1600/venus-of-willendorf-back-view-.jpg
Overemphasized buttocks and breasts, as well as the belly area.

Venus Callipyge
known as the "beautiful buttocks"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_Callipyge

Finally, we must also remember that explaining human procreational urges in biochemical and psychological terms makes sense only when we are talking about humans in their early stages of development. However, today's humans are less-governed by primal instincts, and we are more-able to override those urges because of the influence of social norms and practices. I'm sure most people will agree that we now place a greater emphasis on social and behavioural factors when seeking a mate, such as a person's character, their compatibility, their position in social hierarchy, etc. That's not to say that we completely overlook our ideas of physical beauty, but that it is no longer the sole determinant in procreational behaviour.

When seeking a mate, yes. Other factors play a huge role.
Allow me to rephrase what I had said.
I never meant as a means of searching a partner for marriage. What I meant was a sexual partner.
Mate was the wrong word. What I meant was "wanting to have sex".

"[...] makes sense only when we are talking about humans in their early stages of development"
I couldn't disagree more. No offence intended.
I believe all evolutionary biologists would disagree.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_biology

Women want a men with, the aspects which I listed above.
Men want women with an attractive body.
Of course this doesn't apply to all individuals, but in general I believe it does.

Peace. :peace:
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: uq on February 13, 2016, 04:11:57 AM
"[...] makes sense only when we are talking about humans in their early stages of development"
I couldn't disagree more. No offence intended.

No offence taken.

In light of your rephrasing of what you had posted earlier, I find we are now more in agreement.

Perhaps I should also rephrase my statement from...

[...] today's humans are less-governed by primal instincts.

to...

"[...] today's humans are less expressive of primal instincts."

I do believe that there is a greater modulation of primal urges taking place in today's humans than there would have been in our earlier stages of development. That is to say, I believe that we still feel the same impulses as our earliest ancestors felt (whether relating to procreation, survival, fear, etc.), however, these impulses, in my view, are now more subject to intentional modulation on account of social conditioning.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on May 26, 2020, 11:55:55 AM
salam

in my opinion, there is no theory of evolution and the Quran proves it (i already posted about it in another thread but ill post again, no issue in that i hope aye? lol)

recall this verse:

Say, "Shall I inform you of worse than that as penalty from The God? those whom The God has cursed and with whom He became angry and made of them apes and pigs and slaves of taghut. Those are worse in position and further astray from the sound way." (ch 5, verse 60)

Note here The God tells us He made pigs and apes/monkeys from humans. We can clearly see it today as we know apes/monkeys are genetically similar to humans, and so are pigs/swine (please google it you will see that humans use pig parts as organ transplants and pigs have same thoracic and abdominal organs as humans, skin type, eye lashes and protruding nose, human molars, swine also depress, diseases infecting them infect humans too etc etc hence why pork is forbidden)

The God does not use any adjective to qualify what kind of apes He made from humans and also says He “made from them (humans He was angry with)” meaning the pigs and apes still exist

please note the following verses:

And you had already known about those who transgressed among you concerning the sabbath, and We said to them "Be despicable apes." And We made it a deterrent punishment for those who were present and those who succeeded [them] and a lesson for those who fear The God (ch 2, verses 65 and 66) 

The God uses the adjective despicable and also says “Be” and not “made from them”  and so the humans were turned to despicable apes and died off. these are what the scientists call the common human ape ancestor. and coincidentally all of the fossils were found in africa (and those to whom sabbath was decreed because they disputed in it were in africa - egypt :) )

everytime archeologists find fossils of an individual(s) scientists claim they found new species of ancestors. well if two people, example one measuring 1.74 cm and one 1.84 cm with different weights and bodies, were turned to despicable apes, wont they look and be different?

The God also says they are a deterrent punishment for succeeding generations as well. well we found the fossils and instead of thinking of them as punishment and fearing The God, people are fascinated by them use those fossils as a fake and erroneous explanation to human evolution. the devil indeed fooled many.

please take a look at the ape human common ancestors like lucy and think, arent they abject and weird apes? halfway between apes and humans

there is no evolution. recall aslo when The God tells us the example of jesus is like adam. jesus was created as jesus just as adam was created as asam by The God’s permission and will. theybwere not created as apes who became humans.

please question everything you are told in science books even regarding the earth and universe being billions of years. the only Book that contains the truth and is unquestionable is the Quran.

and frankly, isnt evolution ridiculous? if a fish went out of the sea, it would die, it wont develop lungs and all. it would die in seconds. evolution is even more far fetched than a fairy tale

(early humans like neanderthals are noah’s people. recall the verse where hud tells his people that The God made them successors after noah’s people and increased them in CREATION. The God said noah’s people are a sign, well we found their fossils/skeletons have we not? :) )

there is no theory of evolution that stands

by the way pleaze also google the fact that soft tissue was found in dinosaur bones

any comments are welcome please

peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Layth on May 27, 2020, 02:12:57 AM
Salam,

Not sure I see the logic here.

According to fossilized remains, apes and pigs have been around for millions of years. So, to suddenly make them appear only a few thousand years ago in relation to the story of God degrading some humans to pigs & apes during the Sabaath has no basis.

I can see that God would make people He is angry with into an existing animal (especially ones that are deemed low), but that He would create a new species of animal totally unknown and make humans into that is pretty thin.

Also, while meat of pig is specifically forbidden, you have no such specific prohibition on apes.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Jafar on May 27, 2020, 07:26:11 AM
It's clearly can be seen by merely physical observation that evolution also known as constant change throughout time happened in all aspect of the universe. Galaxy, Stars, Planets, All things inside the planet (rock formation, gases, fluid matter, carbon based lifeforms, human, human's language, human's thought processes, human's culture etc). Only the ignorant would not be able to see such clear observable signs.

Even on this thread alone, the thread starter "Student of Allah" has evolved into a different kind of personality, with different outlook on life and different set of opinion. Compared to the time when she started this thread.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on May 27, 2020, 08:21:56 AM
salam

i did not say The God made apes and pigs from transgressors of sabbath.
i said He made apes and pigs from those He was angry with

those who transgressed against sabbath were told to “Be despicable apes” (what scientists believe to be ape human ancestor)

and layth, what does animal considered “low” mean? what is criteria for low?

i had asked myself about why apes not forbidden...maybe cause The God knows we will not eat them or maybe apes share in dna with bumans but oigs shre in actually body? only The God knows why

i believe in the Quran over “science”, and the Quran says The God made apes and pigs from those He was angry with (no mention of transgressors of sabbath here, please read the verses)

peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on May 27, 2020, 02:16:26 PM
salam

please google similarities between pigs and humans as well as similarities between pigs and apes

coincidence? evolution? i do not think so

also that pig organs are compatible with human organs a coincidence? i dont think so either

The God, in His infinite mercy, gave us a proof when He told us He made pigs and apes from humans. glory and thanks to The God

here are some website:

https://www.science.org.au/curious/people-medicine/similarities-between-humans-and-pigs

https://farmsnotfactories.org/articles/5-ways-pigs-humans-alike/

https://pandasthumb.org/archives/2013/12/yes-you-share-a.html

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.mnn.com/earth-matters/animals/stories/amp/pigs-and-humans-more-closely-related-thought-according-genetic-analysis

pig flesh is forbidden as they are made from humans

Say: "Shall I inform you of worse than this as a punishment from God Those whom God cursed and became angry at them, and He made from them apes and pigs and servants of evil. Those have a worst place and are more astray from the right path." (ch 5, verse 60) btw its a translation from monotheist group :)

in arabic: ja3ala minhom(o?) and not ja3alahom
which i understand to be “made from them” and not “made them into” or “turned them into”

that is my understanding

peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Noon waalqalami on May 28, 2020, 01:12:56 AM
pig flesh is forbidden as they are made from humans

Say: "Shall I inform you of worse than this as a punishment from God Those whom God cursed and became angry at them, and He made from them apes and pigs and servants of evil. Those have a worst place and are more astray from the right path." (ch 5, verse 60) btw its a translation from monotheist group :)

in arabic: ja3ala minhom(o?) and not ja3alahom
which i understand to be “made from them” and not “made them into” or “turned them into”

that is my understanding

peace

peace, read in context about behavior… 5:60 humans serve false idols/deities

humans approached speaking
5:61 واذا wa-idha/and when of (time adverb present/future) جاوكم they come to you قالوا said they of

واذ wa-idh/and when i.e. written without the trailing alif denotes time adverb refers to past episode

acting like aggressive monkeys
5:62 وترى and thou see كثىرا much منهم minhum/of them ىسرعون hastening فى in الاثم the detriment والعدون and the transgression

behaving as swine devouring foul etc.
5:62 واكلهم and consumption theirs السحت the illicit

Berlin, State Library: ms.or.fol. 4313
606-652, CE (95.4%) [¹⁴C dating by Coranica] - parchment
https://corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/5/vers/60/handschrift/15

(https://i.postimg.cc/CMHvHpp0/ch5v59-67.jpg)

6:38 وما and not من of دابه creature فى in الارض the land ولا and not طىر flyer ىطىر flyed بجنحىه with wings two its الا except امم communities  امثلكم similitude's you ما not فرطنا neglect we of فى in الكتب the book من of شى thing ثم furthermore الى to ربهم lord theirs ىحشرون gathered being
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on May 28, 2020, 07:51:26 AM
salam

you are assuming that (ch5, v61) is speaking about those turned to apes and swine. for me its clear that verse and what follows is speaking about disbelievers.

also, (ch5, v6) also say “and when they come to you” not “and when these come to you” so for me “they” means the unbelievers in general

in (ch5, v60) The God says He made apes and swine from those He was angry with. why start intepreting? it is as The God tells us.

i have a question, why do people assume swine (and apes) are “low” animals? what is your criteria for them being “low”?? what does it even mean “low”? is a fly “low” and an eagle “high”? is a donkey “low” and a hippo “high”?
and why would pork be forbidden if not that they were made from humans as mentioned clearly?

and by the way, coincidence apes and swine are extremely like humans (physically and psychologically)??

every word in the Quran is measured. it is from The God.
whilst in ch5, v60 we are told swine and apes are made from humans, in ch2, v65 we are told The God told sabbath transgressors “be despicable apes”. not that He made from them despicable apes, but (transformed) “be despicable apes”. so they were turnd to despicable apes (what scientists think is the common human ape ancestor) and died off.

peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on May 28, 2020, 10:51:29 AM
salam noon waalqalami

i also want to please add something

when you say acting like aggressive monkeys... what does that mean??? do aggressive monkeys hasten in sin and transgression??? why even assume aggressive monkeys??

and when you quote the part saying devouring what is illicit...you automatically assume food? how about what is illicit meaning also money of orphans, or money from interest, or from theft etc etc do swine do that?

and if you mean food... if they act like swine and devour illicit food.. swine is forbidden yeah? so by acting like swine and devouring illicit food... we should understand swine eating itself?

in my opinion, we should take the Quran at face value and whatever The God says is the Truth. no need to start interpeting in my opinion.

peace :)
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Noon waalqalami on May 28, 2020, 12:52:08 PM
you are assuming that (ch5, v61) is speaking about those turned to apes and swine. for me its clear that verse and what follows is speaking about disbelievers.

peace, no – you assume not reading "in context" ...

it is not talking about some past event e.g.: واذ wa-idh
again, whole episode is constantly present: واذا wa-idha

5:60 قل say هل shall انبىكم I enlighten you ...
5:61 واذا wa-idha/and when of (present/future) جاوكم they come to you قالوا said they of ...
5:62 وترى and thou see كثىرا much of منهم minhum/of them ىسرعون hastening فى in الاثم the detriment ...
5:63 لولا why not ىنههم prohibit them الربنىون the rabbis being والاحبر and the scholars عن about قولهم speech theirs الاثم the detriment واكلهم and consumption theirs السحت the illicit لبىس surely wretched ما what كانوا be they of ىصنعون working

Quote
i have a question, why do people assume swine (and apes) are “low” animals?

who are you assuming that they are assuming?

Quote
and why would pork be forbidden if not that they were made from humans as mentioned clearly?

same as forbidden:
المىته the lifeless والدم and the blood ...
وما and what ذبح slaughter على on النصب the alters (includes finest beef, etc.)...

Quote
and by the way, coincidence apes and swine are extremely like humans (physically and psychologically)??

same 4-bit chemical program (all life) apes share 99% of DNA, cats 90%, pigs and dogs 84%, cows 80% etc.

Quote
... but (transformed) “be despicable apes”. so they were turnd to despicable apes...

no, they were chastised (faqul'nā) not turned into apes nor made to be steadfast in the justice, etc.

2:65 … فقلنا faqul'nā/so said we of لهم to them كونوا kūnū/be ye of قرده monkeys خاسىىن despicable!
4:135 ىاىها O you الذىن the ones امنوا believes ye of كونوا kūnū/be ye of قومىن steadfast بالقسط in the justice

why even assume aggressive monkeys??

read "in context" 5:60-63 what is says...
 ىسرعون hastening فى in الاثم the detriment والعدون wal-udwani/and the transgression

Quote
and when you quote the part saying devouring what is illicit...you automatically assume food?

it is you making assumptions every other sentence.
read carefully my posts, quote me, do not assume.

4:161 واخذهم and seized they الربا the usury وقد and assuredly نهوا prohibit they of عنه on it
 واكلهم and consumption theirs امول wealth الناس the people بالبطل in the falsehood ...

5:62/63 ... واكلهم and consumption theirs السحت the illicit لبىس surely wretched ما what كانوا be they of ىعملون working


Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on May 28, 2020, 02:04:43 PM
salam

regarding the “low”, sorry it was meant for layth regarding his previous post (and to people who claim that swine is forbidden because it is a “low/unclean animal”)

you say “ no, they were chastised (faqul'nā) not turned into apes nor made to be steadfast in the justice, etc.”

do you realize that The God told us that when He wants something He simply says to it “Be” and it is (and it is logical as He owns what is, and He owns existence (He creates existence))

“He is the One Who has originated the heavens and the earth, and when He wills to a thing, He only says to it: 'BE', AND IT BECOMES.” (chapter 2, verse 117)

so by telling the sabbath transgressors “be despicable apes”, well they became despicable apes

and He also told us the example of jesus is like adam, The God simply told jesus to “be” and jesus came to existence in mariame’s womb.so where is evolution here? and if adam was told “be” and he was as well, where is evolution? did adam appear in a human/monkey hybrid’s womb? well i personal highly doubt (although obviously The God is capable of all things)
adam was in paradise before earth and then adam was told to descend to earth. so as i understand it, adam was created as adam before The God sent him to earth

and adam was created in his image (we know that there are non like The God (plse see verse below) so perhaps in his image meant adam was created as adam and not as part of evolution? or maybe The God is telling us adam has free will? but the angels and djinns have free will i think. animals too. or perhaps The God means the ability to reason? but yet again there are none like The God (i am giving other possibilities because only The God knows the truth))
“The Creator of the heavens and the earth. He hath made for you pairs of yourselves, and of the cattle also pairs, whereby He multiplieth you. NAUGHT IS AS HIS LIKENINESS; and He is the Hearer, the Seer.“ chapter 42 verse 11

for chapter 5, verse 60, The God says those He cursed, and not those He curses. so it is a past tense. the word “cursed” is past tense as such it was the past for prophet mohammed’s (pbuh and pbu all the other prophets and messengers) generation yeah?

the following is just an assumption i am making please do not quote me. if you are saying that people becoming apes and pigs is present or an ongoing process (perhaps why not?) then pigs you see are made from transgressors up to this day maybe? look at what disbelievers say in chapter 40 verse 11:

“They will say, "Our Lord, You killed us (or made us lifeless?) twice and gave us life twice, and we have confessed our sins. So is there to an exit any way?"”

maybe disbelievers have a life as humans then as pigs? note that in hell disbelievers will not die nor be alive as we read in chapter 14 verse 17:

“he will gulp it but will hardly swallow it. And death will come to him from everywhere, but he is not to die. And before him is a massive punishment“

you mention pork is forbidden just as blood, carrion etc but what is your understanding of the reasons?

just for extra, here is my take on the forbidden foods:

already dead/lifeless: it has been dead already we do not know if it was killed in the name of The God or not (was it killed by dsibeliever or another animal? or died naturally?) and also not safe for consumption (bacteria parasites etc)

blood: i think blood carries something about life, like perhaps the fuel for our bodies (although not a reference, please check what the bible says about blood)

dedicated to other than The God: well obviously we should give thanks before we kill an animal (as well as give thanks to The God for any other food we eat before we take a bite) and as such the animals should be sacrificed it to The King.

pork: akin to cannibalism as they were made form humans

thats just my take on it and and my understanding, perhaps i am completely wrong :)

only The God knows the truth

peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: jkhan on May 28, 2020, 07:43:25 PM
Peace brother TFruti. .

Yes.. You are wrong as you claim.. " Perhaps I am completely wrong "

But in this case.. Your claim that pork is forbidden coz swine is from Human is total assumption which has no instructions from God.. May be it can be a blasphemy on God's verses..
God simply forbidden.. So they are forbidden.. Why forbidden is for our ASSUMPTIONS  not necessarily true and required either. But in the case of pork.. God says it is "rijz"... People can take various reason according to studies in pork since it is mentioned rijz while forbidden ..
BTW God only forbidden flesh of swine and not whole of swine.. So. Your claim further weakens.. Can you forbid the fat of swine?  So how do you take it without killing.. Further under compulsion and dire necessity pork can be consumed.. As well meat of apes not forbidden.. There needs consistency if the reason is as you claim ..

God promises that He will fill Men and Jinn in hell and they (disbelievers) and stones are fuel for hell..2:24 ... Not apes and pigs..

Let turn to the point.. I have tried to understand those apes and pigs verses,  but unfortunately cannot conclude to date with convinced set of mind.. .. Whether God made them from Human out of shear ANGER and CURSE on them apes and pigs or those verses mean something else..
Probably you are right God made them from those community if taken literally... But your claim for reasons forbidden food within Quran is weak.. But assumptions..

One more thing.. In case God made from that community Apes and Pigs then it is not fair on their children ... God send human in this world to be tested and not by birth be apes and pigs and be tested... God created men and Jin for testing.. No animals included..
But in the case of that community.. God used not only the word pigs but apes.. Two type of animals concerning Disbelieving aggressive people.. And note the ANGER/WRATH of God as well CURSE of God over them.. This doesn't happen normally.. Even in case if God turned them,  that could be the end of them (as destruction )for me and no more living so that story continues based on one communities disastrous action.. Others no need to feel the brunt of them.. It's not testing.. Remember God tests Human and Jin...
Note below verse..

4:47 "O! You who have been given the Book, believe in what We have sent down, confirming what is with you, before We obliterate faces, and turn them upon their backs, or curse them as We cursed the Sabbath-men, and God's command is done"

So,  it was a warning to the people of scripture as well through QURAN .. So it seems similar to Sabbath never happened again (God knows though.. Could have happened as well).. But God warns.. So.. Apes and pigs already were living when verse 4:47 was revealed.. But still God promises that He is ready to turn them into as it was done to Sabaath-breakers .. In case God accomplished what He promised in verse 4:47... We can't claim again that apes and pigs came from Human after this verse.

God's CURSE and WRATH together normally can only be a destruction  ... Once God cursed no way out at all.. And coupled with anger then God only knows what He does..

For me.. Apes and pigs were created well before as all of other animals..  And in the case of Sabaathbreakers it was only a punishment and destruction...  Hope they all died..

Read carefully 7:165 and 166 .. It was a punishment and others who obeyed was saved... And these were destroyed but with a shameless destruction to feel them.. 

And it seems it has happened in various occasions... Sabbath is clear Apes... not pigs. That could be another occasion. . And don't forget God turned another group to slaves/worshipers of taguth.  ..(5:60)
But Sabaathbreakers case very clear a destruction..  And only apes mentioned for them..
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on May 28, 2020, 08:01:22 PM
salam jkhan

again, i said those that The God made from apes and swine are NOT the sabbath transgressors

the sabbath transgressors were transformed into “despicable apes” and NOT swine and it was a punishment, and i understand they died off

pigs and swine : made from disbelievers

despicable apes : sabbath transgressors told to “be despicable apes”, we are NOT told The
God “made from” the sabbath transgressors despicable apes

why did The God add adjective “despicable” in this case? why did He say “be” and “made from”?
where were the sabbath transgressors if not egypt? where were allllll ape human common ancestors found by archeologists? africa ! where is egypt? africa !
coincidence?

i am not making assumptions, i am taking the verses as they are and literally.

anyways to each and everyone their beliefs. if i am wrong then may The God please guide me if He wants.

peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: jkhan on May 28, 2020, 11:05:20 PM
salam jkhan

again, i said those that The God made from apes and swine are NOT the sabbath transgressors

the sabbath transgressors were transformed into “despicable apes” and NOT swine and it was a punishment, and i understand they died off

pigs and swine : made from disbelievers

despicable apes : sabbath transgressors told to “be despicable apes”, we are NOT told The
God “made from” the sabbath transgressors despicable apes

why did The God add adjective “despicable” in this case? why did He say “be” and “made from”?
where were the sabbath transgressors if not egypt? where were allllll ape human common ancestors found by archeologists? africa ! where is egypt? africa !
coincidence?

i am not making assumptions, i am taking the verses as they are and literally.

anyways to each and everyone their beliefs. if i am wrong then may The God please guide me if He wants.

peace

Peace again brother..

Explore...  And don't be adamant while exploring.. Relax.. Listen to others and ponder and verify... Exploration is combination of success and failure..
You have no evidence to resort to a firm decision that all pigs in this world are human once and still they are but their figure looks pigs.. You need to skin off to prove this..

Sabbath is one incident... And apes involved.. They were punished...

Taguth converted people another incident.. And people continued to live.. May be still around. No idea..

Pigs involved is another people.. How do you say that they live... If not with curse and wrath of God He won't convert them to pigs.. Such things always for destruction.. Coz we can take example from Sabaathbreakers = People + apes..  Involved.. Died as destruction...

Which people ?????? = people + pigs  involved... Didn't they tast the destruction?

But in taghut case God let them live in their blindness unless they change themselves ... Such a curse..

But with the time and new generation even the taghut people would have believed.. There is chance as per Quran verses.. 2:256

So dear rush of blood... Lol... You have no proof from Quran that pigs are human once..
You coin pig story to which prophet period?  Any proof?  So no pigs UNTILL then on earth? Is it Musa you claim?

Further..  5:60 it was in order... Apes  then pig then taghut.. So apes from Sabaathbreakers then pigs has to be after sabath...
Which prophet related to sabath.. ?

Your google search says this..

Pigs are also called swine. Pigs were among the first animals to be domesticated — about 9,000 years ago — in China and in a region in what is now Turkey. Asian farmers first brought domesticated pigs to Europe around 7,500 years ago, according to Smithsonian magazine.

If domesticated  then they must be living well before.. That's what your google says..
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on May 29, 2020, 12:24:27 AM
salam

again, the sabbath breakers and those from whom pigs and apes were made are not the same thing

again, the sabbath breakers were told to “BE DESPICABLE” apes and NOT “apes and swine” but DESPICABLE APES (note the adjective DESPICABLE)

i am not claiming that the swine and apes are during musa time. you are assuming that because you have not understood what i am saying. again sabbath breakers and those from whom swine and apes were made are not the same.

and why do you assume that those from whom The God made apes and pigs had to be during a prophet or messenger lifetime or during a prophet or messenger mission?

regarding the swine and ape, my proof is from the Quran. The God said He made from them THE swine and THE apes (AL QIRADATA and AL KHANAZEERA) note the “AL” which is “THE”

again, sabbath breakers and apes/swine are TWO DIFFERENT things

your quote from the internet about domestication does not mean anything. humans try to make “sense” of everything. they try to make everything be “scientific”

and even so, let us assume swine was indeed domesticated in china and turkey, who says those The God made from swine were not first in china and turkey? who says they have to be just one group of people in one location at one time?

and again, sabbath breakers and those whom swine and apes were made from ARE NOT THE SAME

i have no blood rush or so, i am just merely expressing my understanding. i am using capital letters to get my point through

i am not adamant... i am passionate about my worship of The God

anyways i rest my case.

peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: jkhan on May 29, 2020, 01:42:12 AM
Then anyone would wonder why you claimed sabath was in Egypt? 
What made you to decide?  From Quran or outside?
God destroys always after a Warner is sent and being called for right path... That's why I asked which messenger you refer since openly claimed Egypt and Africa...
 Okay rest... That would give you relaxation... And open more vistas
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on May 29, 2020, 08:08:52 AM
salam

again, the people from whom swine and apes were made are not the sabbath transgressors

the sabbath transgressors issue took place when beni israel were in egypt. as sabbath was given to beni israel, all i can think of is perhaps the issue happening after jospeh time (as i understand beni israel are descendants of joseph and his brothers when they moved to legypt)

sabbath was given to beni israel from my understanding as they disputed in it (my opinion is they got the sabbath because they blasphemed by saying the fabrication that The God rested on the 7th day) the question is, was the sabbath decreed before the Torah was sent or after the Torah was sent

when they were told “be despicable apes”, they transformed into what scientists call the human/ape ancestor who ate neither human. nor ape, but a despicable and weird looking human//ape

scientists claim that humans evolved from within africa because all the human/ape ancestor fossils were found in africa

egypt is in africa - so i am guessing either they (they as in the sabbath transgressors turned into despicable apes) fled from egypt to locations such as kenya when they were transformed or there were diasporas already existing across eastern africa

AGAIN, humans from whom swine and apes were made are not the same as the sabbath breakers

peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Noon waalqalami on May 31, 2020, 10:31:08 AM
do you realize that The God told us that when He wants something He simply says to it “Be” and it is (and it is logical as He owns what is, and He owns existence (He creates existence))

“He is the One Who has originated the heavens and the earth, and when He wills to a thing, He only says to it: 'BE', AND IT BECOMES.” (chapter 2, verse 117)

so by telling the sabbath transgressors “be despicable apes”, well they became despicable apes

peace, it's not the same these describe process ...

2:117... فانما so solely ىقول speaketh له to it كن be فىكون so being
3:47 .... فانما so solely ىقول speaketh له to it كن be فىكون so being
19:35 ... فانما so solely ىقول speaketh له to it كن be فىكون so being
40:68 ... فانما so solely ىقول speaketh له to it كن be فىكون so being

3:59 ... ثم furthermore قال said له to him كن be فىكون so being
6:73 ... وىوم and day ىقول speaketh كن be فىكون so being
16:40 ... نقول we speak له to it كن be فىكون so being
36:82 ... ىقول speaketh له to it كن be فىكون so being

whereas this is speech, not about creation etc.

2:65  فقلنا so said we of لهم to them "كونوا be ye of قرده monkeys خسىىن despicable"
17:50 قل say "كونوا be ye of حجره stone او or حدىدا iron of"

if transformed when were they named قرده qiradatan?
which language were people at that time speaking?

why so many monkeys across the globe spread quickly?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01t197x/p01w4yv8

the following is just an assumption i am making please do not quote me. if you are saying that people becoming apes and pigs is present or an ongoing process (perhaps why not?) then pigs you see are made from transgressors up to this day maybe? look at what disbelievers say in chapter 40 verse 11:

5:60 ... وجعل and made منهم of them القرده the monkeys والخنزىر and the swines وعبد and devote الطغوت the false idols

figurative or non-literal language

(https://i.pinimg.com/474x/e0/9a/ff/e09affb151eb810bf4780078109a41ae--monkey-business-monkeys.jpg)
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on May 31, 2020, 11:09:30 AM
salam noon waalqalami

you mention surah 17 verse 50.
please note it is not The God who tells people to be iron and stone. The God tells the believers (or maybe muhammed pbuh, depending on whom the verse was addressed to) to “say” to the disbelievers whether they be of iron or stone, or whatever creation, they will still be ressurected.

whilst in the verse about the sabbath transgressors, it is The God who tells them “Be despicable apes”. note that he verse says “We (The God) told them Be despicable apes”

you say “if transformed when were they named قرده qiradatan?
which language were people at that time speaking?”
i do not understand what you mean and what is your point

you say why did monkeys spread quickly. why do you assume that those whom pigs and apes were made from originate from middle east and that it was just a one time event? The God says those He was angry with. He does not say the one nation or “qawm” He was angry with. He says “those” He was angry with. so perhaps He was angry with people across the globe and throughout different times? my advice, do not go assuming things

The God said “made from them THE apes and THe pigs” why not believe that He literally made from them apes and swine??? and that it is a sign and proof from The God to the believers !
is it a coincidence that swine and apes are very similar to humans? even to the point that scientist say humans originated from apes and swine hybrid? and that swine organs are compatible with humans? etc etc

peace :)
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on June 01, 2020, 09:24:03 AM
salam

i would like to share another website and quote a passage from it (please read the website and also google research)

“But pigs offer more than just a potential source for organ donation. For over 30 years, scientists have been using pigs in a number of medical fields, including dermatology, cardiology and more. Recently, scientists were even able to re-grow human leg muscles using implants made of pig bladder tissue.”

“No one really knows why the organs and anatomical systems of pigs are so similar to humans. Swindle (retired veterinary researcher) theorizes that millions of years ago, they were even more similar, but then the species diverged genetically and independently developed similar characteristics through evolution.”
https://www.foxnews.com/health/why-pigs-are-so-valuable-for-medical-research

scientists keep throwing theories to try to explain why apes, pigs and humans are extremely similar, so they come up with ridiculous things like evolution and common ancestor etc. but us (who believe the Quran is from The God) we know the true answer. we know why apes and pigs are very similar to humans. The God, in His infinite mercy, told us in the Quran. He made them from humans. i believe it is yet another sign and proof from The God to humanity, and that is definately a mercy from Him !

i thank The God !

peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Noon waalqalami on June 02, 2020, 01:51:39 PM
salam noon waalqalami

you mention surah 17 verse 50.
please note it is not The God who tells people to be iron and stone. The God tells the believers (or maybe muhammed pbuh, depending on whom the verse was addressed to) to “say” to the disbelievers whether they be of iron or stone, or whatever creation, they will still be ressurected.

whilst in the verse about the sabbath transgressors, it is The God who tells them “Be despicable apes”. note that he verse says “We (The God) told them Be despicable apes”

you say “if transformed when were they named قرده qiradatan?
which language were people at that time speaking?”
i do not understand what you mean and what is your point

you say why did monkeys spread quickly. why do you assume that those whom pigs and apes were made from originate from middle east and that it was just a one time event? The God says those He was angry with. He does not say the one nation or “qawm” He was angry with. He says “those” He was angry with. so perhaps He was angry with people across the globe and throughout different times? my advice, do not go assuming things

The God said “made from them THE apes and THe pigs” why not believe that He literally made from them apes and swine??? and that it is a sign and proof from The God to the believers !
is it a coincidence that swine and apes are very similar to humans? even to the point that scientist say humans originated from apes and swine hybrid? and that swine organs are compatible with humans? etc etc


peace, read in context one incidence during time of Musa 2:63-66, 2:92-93, 4:47-48, 4:154, 7:163-168
 قلنا said we of لهم to them “كونوا be ye of قرده monkeys خسىىن despicable!”
no mention of swine or conversion rather a direct “statement/chastisement” and they were punished unstated how; likewise quran is a translation into Arabic of dialog that transpired in their language at the time which according to you there would be no monkeys or a word for monkeys in any language until later after they spread regardless of initial location. Therefore, in your theory you cannot use above verses.

5:60 read in context about behavior e.g. 7:179/25:44 كالانعم kal-anami/like “the” cattle
likewise, dna were a closer to the cow than the swine.

Berlin, State Library: ms.or.fol. 4313
606-652, CE (95.4%) [¹⁴C dating by Coranica] - parchment
https://corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/5/vers/60/handschrift/15

(https://i.postimg.cc/CMHvHpp0/ch5v59-67.jpg)
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on June 02, 2020, 02:03:52 PM
salam noon waalqalami

again, the episode with the sabbath transgressors is not the same as when we are told The God made apes and pigs from humans.

sabbath transgressors were turned into despicable apes
yes they were punished and we are told how!
they are turned into despicable apes !!

and this is not the same as when we are told The God made pigs and apes from people He was angry with. THEY ARE NOT RELATED :)

what do you mean who called them monkeys?

well, who called a cow a cow? or a rabbit a rabbit? or a fly a fly? or a car a car?
even today im guessing new animal species are found and named
well, with The God’s permission, when people stumbled upon apes they called them apes and same for pigs

we do not use cow organs in humans, and we do not have same organs as cows or same skin etc etc
with swine yes !!!!

you say “5:60 read in context about behavior e.g. 7:179/25:44 كالانعم kal-anami/like “the” cattle”

here there is “like the”, but regarding the pig and ape verse there is NO “like the”
there is “We MADE FROM THEM the apes and the pigs” and NOT “made them “like” the apes and the swines”

peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on June 02, 2020, 08:45:58 PM
salam noon waalqalamk

i want to add something
you use translation of  “ja3ala minhom” as “made of them” and not “made from them”

if it was “made of them”, then you mean pigs existed before and some humans turned to pigs and apes?
but that is NOT correct

why? well alllllll pigs and apes are similar to humans !
whatever pig you pick up, its still a pig and has same body as allll the other pigs ! otherwise it would not be a pig !!

and its organs will be compatible with humans cause it is a pig like allllll the other pigs !

you dont have some pigs compatible with humans and some not - that does not make sense, it would mean that every pig is a different animal

there is swine, there is NOT swine version 1 and swine version 2 and swine version 3 etc :s
there is swine, as there is human, there is cat, fly, horse etc

also, when someone asks you where you are from - you reply “min”
“min” means from

anyways peace my friend
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: jkhan on June 02, 2020, 11:06:36 PM
4:47 "O! You who have been given the Book, believe in what We have sent down, confirming what is with you, before We obliterate faces, and turn them upon their backs, or curse them as We cursed the Sabbath-men, and God's command is done"

Peace...
Do anyone have a better research on what I have highlighted and underlined...  What exactly does that mean to you...
Or simply what you understand when you read it..

@ TF...
God didn't forbid  apes so your claim still weak... And pigs also not forbidden in a sense as they were human.. Only flesh forbidden  and I can eat pork if compelled so... The reason to forbid is no way near what you claim.. Try to understand your claim is weak.. Don't be adamant.. It's so clear... God never forbids coz pigs are human.. Lol...

Furthet I do t see anything wrong NW calling made of them --- minhum.. Even made from them or even  made among them... Just all works...
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on June 03, 2020, 08:49:49 AM
salam jkhan

you may eat pigs if compelled just as you may eat carrion when you are compelled

i do not understand what is the issue with being given permission to eat a forbidden food if compelled and not seeking transgression. how does that negate the fact that swine was made from humans???

why apes are not forbidden to eat? only The God knows. maybe the way pigs were made from humans is not the same as the way apes where made (actually body versus just dna etc) or maybe because those to whom the Book was sent do not eat apes anyways, but tend to eat swine.
i do not know why apes are not forbidden. all i know is to take the Quran as the literal word of The God, and when He says He made apes and pigs from humans, then i believe it
i do not understand why people are interpeting YET AGAIN the Quran, especially a very straight forward verse !!!

you say “The reason to forbid is no way near what you claim.. Try to understand your claim is weak.. Don't be adamant.. It's so clear... God never forbids coz pigs are human.. Lol...”

so what do you claim?? what is your understanding?
you say its soo clear...what do you mean its soo clear? what is soo clear?
if you have some special knowledge please share

anyways peace my friend and good luck
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Noon waalqalami on June 03, 2020, 10:26:54 AM
you use translation of  “ja3ala minhom” as “made of them” and not “made from them”

peace,
it’s not we made “from” them abada l-taghuta – which is an ideology not an animal.

like saying we made from the german people (literally) wiener schnitzel and nazism.

3:110 منهم min’humu/of (among) them المومنون the believing واكثرهم and more them الفسقون the disobeying

9:61 ومنهم wamin’humu/and of (among) them الذىن the ones ىوذون pestering النبى the prophet

21:29-30 ومن and who ىقل sayeth منهم min'hum/of (among) them انى indeed I اله deity من from دونه besides him فذلك so such نجزىه we compensate him/said person جهنم abyss كذلك like such نجزى we compensate الظلمىن the wrongdoers اولم do they not ىر see الذىن the ones كفروا reject they of ان anna (an inna/that indeed) السموت the skies/heavens والارض and the land/earth كانتا be she/they dual رتقا sewn of ففتقنهما so ripped we them dual وجعلنا and made we of من mina/from الما the water كل every شى thing حى live افلا then so not ىومنون believing
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: good logic on June 03, 2020, 11:03:12 AM
Peace All.

Every now and then I get the feeling that I should not approach subjects like this. However I am not listening to me and here we go:

 I will tackle "the controversy of evolution" from all angles,especially from  Science and religion prespectives by first asking the following questions:
1-Where did anyone see an animal, a plant or a human appear as fully grown like by some kind of magic( i.e without going through stages)?
2- Have the stages developped through the ages? If yes ,how?
3- What does Qoran say about stages of creation?

One may say GOD can do magic, but GOD tells us that creation is done by stages . GOD also tells us that there are laws and there is order to the creation. GOD says "be (to the plan) and it is (after certain stages)" .

Let us start with a simple case of the human.
The baby is conceived then starts as a single combined cell of the male and female from their reproductive organs.
This single cell contains information(DNA) guiding its path to become a fully grown baby. DNA codes are shaping the divide of the cell and the production of different organs within the cell to produce a human being with the eyes, ears, brain and all the parts that make it human.
Then GOD has given it the "spirit" of life and out it comes  a baby human.
This baby still will grow and develop physically and mentally while learning about life and preparing to take his/her part in this life as a fully grown adult.(With exceptions of those that do not make it for reasons only known to the creator!)
This is part of what one can define as an evolution ,be it  a specific human one.
Animals and plants have similar process that may differ slightly. One gets the point up to here.

Now here comes the part that has so much controversy and is strill at loggerhead by Science and religion.From the extreme "we come from apes" to GOD created"Adam and Eve" as a whole grown up man and woman!!!

Well ,prepare for some good logic "assumptions" that may marry the two camps, or not!!!
GOD started the creation of the earth in 4 stages that made it habitable for us( solely for our purpose to live here). Part of the stages was the balance of all the elements required for life like Oxygen, CO2, ...etc.
The earth has undergone an evolution to become what it is. The stages were necessary for its completion as a habitable planet.
Similarly all the inhabitants (Animals/iinsects, plants and humans)/were to be created on this earth to compliment this purpose .How?

Remember that first cell that produced the human baby with all its different organs and their functions?
Darwin in a way was right remember his theory about the single cell, you know the one that formed in the water from elements including "clay". l Darwin was wrong in its simplicity. What Darwin did not know(and could not at that time) was that this single cell was complex, full of information(DNA) how to grow and what to produce?

This complex cell had DNA information to produce different species of animals/insects and humans,all at the same time( Like the single baby cell that was programmed to produce different organs of different functions).
To cut a long story ( A very long story of millions of years) short, all the various species came out at once. Each type of species underwent their own evolution and perfection in various surrondings of the "habitable earth" -By natural selection-.

In the case of mankind, well, (Our species and Monkeys evolved separately .We did not evolve from them!!) GOD waited for  our shaping ( Khalaknakum Thumma Sawwarnakum Thumma...) Created us-That first cell-, then shaped us-Through evolution to perfect our shape , brain...etc. Then GOD chose Adam and Eve for the demonstration to the Malaika...-  Of course the rest is history.

Before you ask me to publish any finding in a journal or a book or..
 First I have not found anything that GOD has not given us as information to investigate -either from Qoran or Science or others who studied it-
Second I am saying this is my opinion according to me.
Lastly, it does not matter what one believes ,please let us all try and follow/do the message.

So when GOD says"Badaa Al Khalk"  Started a creation .it always means there are stages to its completion and  we are no different to all other species.
Then when God gave us the Amana- free will-, Monkeys and pigs were not given this. Hence humans did not and will not become monkeys or pigs.
What GOD is saying in the verses is simply "As dispicable as apes /pigs from our point of view.( Not GOD s!)

GOD bless you all.
Peace.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on June 03, 2020, 11:09:36 AM
salam noon waalqalami

we are told THE apes and THE swine but NOT THE abada

and also abada could perhaps mean and “they worship the taghut”

so perhaps The God made from them THE apes and THE swine and they worship the taghut (devil?)

or The God made from them THE apes and THE swine and worshippers of the taghut (devil?) AND NOT THHHHE worshippers of taghut

salam good logic

first, what do you mean by natural selection? what is natural selection? some intelligent mechanism that drives life snd adaptability??

The God decides, not “natural selection”
do not equate natural selection to some power that drives life on earth ... dont you think doing so is shirk?
The God decides, and not some mechanism humans invented in their minds and called natural selection (or you say The God created the mechanism of natural selection? buy why? and The God governs the world, and everyday He is governing it (as told to us in the Quran))
...

when you say stages etc and you mention as the baby comes out it is developing etc..the baby is still human..it will not grow into something not human. a baby develops into a human and stays a human. where is natural selection and transformation here? do some babies develop into something non human? no, babies grow into what ever species they are meant to be.
a baby cat becomes an adult cat, a baby human becomes an adult human, a baby fly becomes an adult fly etc

you say “ What GOD is saying in the verses is simply "As dispicable as apes /pigs from our point of view.( Not GOD s!”
why are you assuming this???

you say “ Then when God gave us the Amana- free will-, Monkeys and pigs were not given this. Hence humans did not and will not become monkeys or pigs.”
who said the apes and monkeys given amana?
first off, we need to stop assuming that we know what amana is and equating it to free will or reason etc we do not know what amana is, case closed
and for your reference, you claim it is free will..well a horse can decide to rest or to go jumping in the field or a dog can decide to come lie down next to its master or run etc etc so animals have free will. you dont think?

the mountains, skies and the earth refused the amana, so did they not think? to refuse it, they thought about it perhaps? so is that not reasoning? and to accept or refuse it, is thay not a sign of free will? they had the free will to accept it or refuse it right?
we are actually told the human being accepted it and the human is ignorant and transgressor. so perhaps it is we who reasoned wrong
my point - do not assume about what amana is, we simply do not know

second, monkeys and pigs came AFTER humans as they were made FROM humans. so what are you saying by monkeys and apes not given amana?? as they came AFTER humans and FROM humans

adam was created as adam, not as something that evolved into adam
adam was created as adam (you agree?) and then came down to earth as adam with his wife (why do people call her eve by the way?? we are not told her name)

regarding “early” humans like neandertals, please read this verse (chapter 7 verse 69):

“Do you consider it odd that there should come to you a reminder from your Lord through a man from among yourselves, so that he may warn you? Remember when He made you successors after the people of Noah, and increased you vastly in CREATION. So remember Allah’s bounties so that you may be felicitous.’”

The God increased the people of ad in CREATION after noah’s people. The word “khol9a” is creation. so yeah, noah’s people are what scientists call “early humans”

there is no evolution by natural selection. that does not even mean anything. The God govrns the world, as is clearly told to us in the Quran, and He is capable of everything

anyways it is an extremely straight forward verse (s)
but it seems each understands it differently

peace and good luck
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: good logic on June 03, 2020, 02:17:26 PM
Peace tutti_frutti

Yes brother, I am sure reading your posts , we have a different understanding. As sure as there was evolution of all the species,  A GOD guided evolution of course.

I do not really know where to start or if it is worth the effort  conversing about this huge gulf of views in our understanding of evolution and the creation of mankind.
So you think this,quote:
"adam was created as adam, not as something that evolved into adam
adam was created as adam (you agree?) and then came down to earth as adam with his wife (why do people call her eve by the way?? we are not told her name)

I thought Adam was created on earth? (Minha khalknakum  Wa Fiha Nuhidukum Wa Minha Nukhrijukum ...)
From the earth we have created you(Beni Adam includes Adam) and on earth we reproduce you and from earth we will resurrect you.

If you do not mind I will pass from the conversation altogether as I find  we are miles apart in our views and it will be pointless

Like I said let us both put our effort in living the message. Please forgive me if I do not respond on this subject.
Good luck to you as well.
Thank you and GOD bless you.
Peace.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on June 03, 2020, 03:25:31 PM
salam good logic

hope your well

yes i understand adam was created from earth/(clay? but adam and his wife first lived in paradise (unless you equate paradise to earth)

“and “o adam, dwell, you and your wife, in paradise (garden/jannah) and eat from wherever you will but do not approach this tree, lest you be among the wrongdoers."” (ch 7, verse 19)

then adam was told “to go down”.  the go down for me means earth, as earth is mentioned in same verse and the “that which they were in” perhaps means existence free from hardship and knowledge of nudity (i do not know, i only think)

“but satan caused them to slip out of it and removed them from that in which they had been. and We said, "go down, as enemies to one another, and you will have upon the earth a place of settlement and provision for a time."” (ch 2, verse 36)

in any case whether adam was created on earth then put in paradise or created in paradise from clay/eartg, that does not change that there is no evolution. i do not see the relationship between being on earth or paradise and evolution

you realize i hope that idea of “evolution”  exists only because scientists cannot explain why humans are similar to apes, and cannot also explain why there are “depsicable” apes (what they call human ape ancestors) in africa

the only thing they can say is “evolution and natural selection” and humans originated from
africa in order to try to “rationalize” it in their minds

same goes for pigs. scientist see pigs are very similar to humans and so they start saying we have a common ancestors with pigs. just cause they cannot explain it they invent weird theories (plse google the theories if you have time)

we know why apes and pigs are like humans. The God told us in the Quran. He made them from humans. HE decides and HE does what HE wants.

we know who the “human ape ancestors” are. The God told us in the Quran (they are the sabbath breakers who were made into despicable apes) please look at the verses 65 and 66 of chapter 2:

“for you are well aware of those from among you who profaned the Sabbath, whereupon We said to them, "Be apes, despised."

And We made it a deterrent punishment for those who were present and those who succeeded [them] and a lesson for those who fear The God.”

The God says they are a deterrent punishement for those of that time and succeeding generations ! well, we found them ! we found their fossils/skeletons! they are a warning to us !!

if you say what about the generations before the human/ape skeletons were found, check verse 106 of surah 2:

“Whatever sign (aya) do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring a better one or similar to it. know you not that The God is able to do all things?”

for me “aya” means signs here and not verses.
we have skeletons and fossils of those “apes” whilst perhaps previous generations had other signs and proofs and coming generations will have other signs and proofs

please think about evolution and the idea of humans and apes sharing an ancestor, and natural selection very hard and you’ll hopefully see that it is extremely silly

anyways yeah we have too much of a gap in our understanding lol mayb i am compleeeetely wrong indeed, but i believe what i believe

good luck my friend. looking forward to reading your other thoughts and understanding of the Quran and our worship of The God

peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: jkhan on June 03, 2020, 05:46:05 PM
salam jkhan

you may eat pigs if compelled just as you may eat carrion when you are compelled

i do not understand what is the issue with being given permission to eat a forbidden food if compelled and not seeking transgression. how does that negate the fact that swine was made from humans???

why apes are not forbidden to eat? only The God knows. maybe the way pigs were made from humans is not the same as the way apes where made (actually body versus just dna etc) or maybe because those to whom the Book was sent do not eat apes anyways, but tend to eat swine.
i do not know why apes are not forbidden. all i know is to take the Quran as the literal word of The God, and when He says He made apes and pigs from humans, then i believe it
i do not understand why people are interpeting YET AGAIN the Quran, especially a very straight forward verse !!!

you say “The reason to forbid is no way near what you claim.. Try to understand your claim is weak.. Don't be adamant.. It's so clear... God never forbids coz pigs are human.. Lol...”

so what do you claim?? what is your understanding?
you say its soo clear...what do you mean its soo clear? what is soo clear?
if you have some special knowledge please share

anyways peace my friend and good luck
Brother.. Peace..

Unfortunately you are repeating.. And you have no idea in each thread what you write.. You skip..

Your quote "i have a question, why do people assume swine (and apes) are “low” animals? what is your criteria for them being “low”?? what does it even mean “low”?"

Coz God called flesh of swine is "Rijz" ..whatever the meaning you take for rijz I don't mind.. But God simply forbid it and called rijz not given the reason as equal to human flesh.

Your quote "and why would pork be forbidden if not that they were made from humans as mentioned clearly?"

This is the claim I entered to this topic.. You openly claimed the above..
It's not true.. You can't make it true while you don't have proof..
Only one verse in entire Quran 5:60 says ja'ala minhum apes and pigs.. So it is common verse to apes and pigs.. Remember common verse..
If the reason you take by this verse pigs forbidden coz they are Human and there is no reason why God should allow apes.. What logic is this? So apes also human.. Chapter close..
That's my last take.. Whatever you take is assumptions and assumptions are not equal to truth and evidence from God..

I have no answers through QURAN for illogical  adamance but I can answer for logical questions.. If you want to research whether God turned human into apes and pigs keep researching.. But don't claim forbid matter without proof
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on June 03, 2020, 06:00:42 PM
salam jkhan

many translations translate rijz as impure

so...pig of flesh is impure...why? there is a reason no? and i understand it to be because they were made form humans

being rijz or impure is not a reason !!! it is a condition !!!

anyways, whatever the reason pig is forbidden, it does not change the fact that we are told in the verse that The God made apes and pigs from humans He was angry with

i gave my opinion, and you gave yours  - which is to negate mine. i did not claim to have certitude of anything, i just shared my understanding

but you continuously claim i an wrong. and how can you contiiiinuously claim with certitude that i am wrong???

anyways good luck to you as well

peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: jkhan on June 03, 2020, 06:44:16 PM
salam jkhan

many translations translate rijz as impure

so...pig of flesh is impure...why? there is a reason no? and i understand it to be because they were made form humans

rijz or impure is not a reason !!! it is a condition !!!

i gave my opinion, you give yours  - which is to negate mine

and how can you continuously claim with certitude that i am wrong with???

anyways good luck to you as well

peace

Peace..
Keep calling what you claim but no proof from Quran you will find...

@ Everyone...

3:93 "ALL FOOD was LAWFUL to the Children of Israel except what Israel had made unlawful to himself before the Torah was revealed. Say, [O Muhammad], "So bring the Torah and recite it, if you should be truthful "

carefully read above verse.. What does it say?
 All food  is LAWFUL  ... For whome?  Children of Israel... When God said all food means all.. Even blood or dead animal or pigs.. Simply all....
God didn't forbid.. But children of Israel forbid themselves..
When actually this happened?  BEFORE Torah was revealed... In Torah pigs are mentioned..

Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on June 03, 2020, 07:40:21 PM
salam jkhan

all food was lawful ... because maybe pigs did not exist before or during the time of israel ?!! we do not know who israel was nor when he lived

and as per your understanding, so even the dead animal was legal before israel? and even food dedicated to other than The God was legal? blood was legal too? then The God decided to make them unlawful at some point?
perhaps, The God does what He wants

or maybe ALL food meant ALL FOOD that was not initially illegal (ie dead animals, animals not dedicated to The God, swine, blood ...)

AND anyways, forget the restriction
the point is The God says He made apes and swine from humans He was angry with!
the verse is clear

anyways take care dude

peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Noon waalqalami on June 05, 2020, 02:31:11 PM
salam noon waalqalami

we are told THE apes and THE swine but NOT THE abada

and also abada could perhaps mean and “they worship the taghut”

so perhaps The God made from them THE apes and THE swine and they worship the taghut (devil?)

or The God made from them THE apes and THE swine and worshippers of the taghut (devil?) AND NOT THHHHE worshippers of taghut

no

5:60 … وغضب and anger علىه on him/said person وجعل and made منهم min'humu/of them القرده the monkeys والخنزىر and the swines وعبد and devotee الطغوت l-taghuta/the false idols …

and made of them the monkeys (non-literal idiom)
and made of them the swines (non-literal idiom)
and made of them devotee the false idols (still people!)

5:61 واذا and when of جاوكم they (see above) come to you قالوا said they of امنا believe we of وقد and assuredly دخلوا enter they of بالكفر in the disbelief…

5:62 وترى and thou see كثىرا much of منهم min'hum/of them (see above) ىسرعون hastening فى in الاثم the detriment والعدون and the transgression واكلهم and consumption theirs السحت the illicit لبىس surely wretched ما what كانوا be they of ىعملون working

16:36 ولقد and surely بعثنا raise we of فى in كل every امه community رسولا messenger of ان that اعبدوا devotes they of الله the god واجتنبوا and avoids they of الطغوت l-taghuta/the false idols فمنهم famin'hum/so of (among) them من who هدى guidance الله the god ومنهم wamin'hum/and of (among) them من who حقت justified علىه on him/said person الضلله the misguidance its فسىروا so travel ye of فى in الارض the land فانظروا so observes ye of كىف how كان be عقبه end المكذبىن the deniers

39:17 والذىن and the ones اجتنبوا avoids they of الطغوت l-taghuta/the false idols ان lest ىعبدوها yaʿbuduha/devoted they them …


similar structure …

2:173 انما solely حرم prohibit علىكم upon you المىته the lifeless والدم and the blood ولحم and flesh الخنزىر the swine
prohibit upon you the lifeless
prohibit upon you the blood
prohibit upon you flesh the swine

cannot be an adjective e.g. flesh the rotten
basic rule if definite noun, definite adjective
examples: the flesh (noun) the rotten (adjective)
البىت the house (noun) العتىق the ancient (adjective)

peace!
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on June 05, 2020, 05:15:55 PM
salam noon waalqalami

no use in debating. you are very adamant about those people being made “like” monkeys and swine, and you are very vehement in your conclusion

anyways, let us assume they were made “like” apes and swine as you say

what does that even mean??? they were made to eat bananas and jump on trees??? or they were made to roll on mud like swine?? and they were made to say “oink oink” (pig noise)?

or you mean they were made to be considered “low” as apes and swine?? what does that mean? how do you classify apes and swine as low?? what does low mean?

think please, think

the verse is very clear. The God is capable of everything, literally. why not believe The God when He clearly says He made apes and swine from transgressors He was angry with?

The God told us He made from the transgressors pigs ans and monkeys, why not believe Him ?!! and why do you start interpreting the verse??

peace and good luck
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: jkhan on June 05, 2020, 08:02:11 PM
3:66 "Here you are - those who have argued about that of which you have [some] knowledge, but why do you argue about that of which you have no knowledge? And Allah knows, while you know not"

Peace everyone..
I don't blame NW And TF.. All I can say is you will never get evidence on things God has not given enough knowledge...
If still both of you feel you have evidence....  That can only be your assumptions...


Argue on matters which you have knowledge and don't argue on matters which you have no knowledge...
I debated saying pork was forbidden not coz pigs are human.. Coz I have proof within Quran...  But to claim pigs and apes OR monkeys are born from Human and we see them now as pigs and humans one upon a time they were human ... No knowledge..
Last post on this... Thank you..
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Noon waalqalami on June 05, 2020, 09:58:35 PM
anyways, let us assume they were made “like” apes and swine as you say

what does that even mean???

peace tutti, similar examples...
7:176 كمثل like similitude الكلب the dog
7:179 اولىك those كالانعم like the cattle

Quote
The God told us He made from the transgressors pigs ans and monkeys, why not believe Him ?!! and why do you start interpreting the verse??

min'humu does not mean "from" them literally i.e. no physical features were changed.

3:52 فلما so to what (when) احس perceived عىسى Isa منهم min'humu/of (about) them الكفر the disbelief
3:110  منهم min'humu/of (among) them
5:12  منهم min'humu/of (among) them
5:60 ... وجعل and made منهم min'humu/of (about) them ... devotee الطغوت the false idols
9:61 ومنهم wamin'humu/and of (among) them
15:40 منهم min'humu/of (among) them
33:13 منهم min'humu/of (among) them
38:83 منهم min'humu/of (among) them

peace -- all the best!
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on June 07, 2020, 09:00:32 PM
salam jkhan

no one knows the truth except The God and verses are unserstood by  whomever The God permits to understand them if He wants to.
so the verse you are quoting applies to you as well when you give your opinion, who told you the others are wrong and you are right???

salam noon waalqalami

again, the verses you quote say “LIKE”
like cattle and like dogs

The God does not say He made the transgressor “LIKE” apes and swine !!!
HE says HE MADE apes and swine from/of the transgressors (it doesnt change anything if you translate “minhum” as  “of or from”)

peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Noon waalqalami on June 08, 2020, 08:56:40 AM
peace tutti, it is also written 31:19 واقصد and be moderate ...

https://corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/31/vers/19?handschrift=107

(https://i.postimg.cc/bYbXTbt3/ch31v16-23.jpg)
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Amra94 on July 03, 2020, 06:37:07 AM
Some humans were transformed into apes not the other way around 7:166 So when they were insolent about that which they had been forbidden, We said to them, "Be apes, despised."
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: The Sardar on July 03, 2020, 07:28:09 AM
Some humans were transformed into apes not the other way around 7:166 So when they were insolent about that which they had been forbidden, We said to them, "Be apes, despised."
Brother of ours have done a article about Devolution:

https://www.organisedquran.com/devolution
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: ade_cool on July 08, 2020, 05:19:53 AM
and adam was created in his image (we know that there are non like The God (plse see verse below) so perhaps in his image meant adam was created as adam and not as part of evolution? or maybe The God is telling us adam has free will? but the angels and djinns have free will i think. animals too. or perhaps The God means the ability to reason? but yet again there are none like The God (i am giving other possibilities because only The God knows the truth))
“The Creator of the heavens and the earth. He hath made for you pairs of yourselves, and of the cattle also pairs, whereby He multiplieth you. NAUGHT IS AS HIS LIKENINESS; and He is the Hearer, the Seer.“ chapter 42 verse 11

Salam tutti_frutti,

Just want to comment a bit regarding "Adam was created in His image". That is actually from sahih hadith books and not from Quran.

https://sunnah.com/muslim/53/32

Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying:

Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, created Adam in His image with His length of sixty cubits, and as He created him He told him to greet that group, and that was a party of angels sitting there, and listen to the response that they give him, for it would form his greeting and that of his offspring. He then went away and said: Peace be upon you! They (the angels) said: May there be peace upon you and the Mercy of Allah, and they made an addition of" Mercy of Allah". So he who would get into Paradise would get in the form of Adam, his length being sixty cubits, then the people who followed him continued to diminish in size up to this day.


And that is blasphemy against God. Furthermore, in Sunnism it is forbidden to punch or kick someone on the face as per sahih hadith below (but I guess majority is not even aware about this as the leaders/shaikhs/ustadz/ulamas conceal this and at the same time the followers don't read sahih hadith books themselves, only know what the leaders/shaikhs/ustadz/ulamas carefully cherry pick).


https://sunnah.com/muslim/45/152

This hadith has been transmitted on the authority of Abu Huraira and in the hadith transmitted on the authority of Ibn Hatim Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) is reported to have said:

When any one of you fights with his brother, he should avoid his face for Allah created Adam in His own image.



Wassalam,
Ade
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: tutti_frutti on July 08, 2020, 04:22:44 PM
salam ade

ohhhh i reaaally thought i had read it in The Quran (and then for some reaason it just stayed in my mind and i never actually looked for it when i read the Quran)

thank youuu for the clarification

in any case, i am very convinced that there is no “evolution”

thanx

peace
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: The Sardar on July 11, 2020, 10:10:59 PM
I have been noticing that a lot of atheists trying to input a interpretation of evolution that it was all natural that made us and trying to remove the Creator. But from my point of view, that interpretation only tells us how we were created, not the cause, in fact a question comes to my mind. What cause this natural event to create us? To me it was Allah/The God (SWTAY)

By the way, i am not against evolution, i wouldn't mind evolution but i have heard of issues that has plauged the evolution science such as fossil records.

Just letting everyone know, i didn't check the previous pages so i apologize if i missed anything important.
Title: Re: Theory of Evolution anyone ?
Post by: Jafar on August 01, 2020, 07:20:22 PM
I have been noticing that a lot of atheists trying to input a interpretation of evolution that it was all natural that made us and trying to remove the Creator. But from my point of view, that interpretation only tells us how we were created, not the cause, in fact a question comes to my mind. What cause this natural event to create us? To me it was Allah/The God (SWTAY)

It depends on what one's definition of "The Creator" is.

Evolution or continuously changing is definitely a very natural process and happened to everything in this universe. As long as there is TIME there will be CHANGE and so does the other way around, as long as there is CHANGE there will be TIME. Without change there will be no time and without time there will be no change.

And when one definition of "The Creator" as He who IS.
And He is NOT a 'being' within this universe but the opposite; this universe is a (very small) part of Him.
Then the term "Nature" or "Natural" with "The creator" is actually a synonym, merely an alias.
Law of "The Creator" is the law of nature or the law of nature is the law of "The Creator".

Thus the statement that evolution happened naturally does NOT actually 'removing' the creator but supports it.
Evolution happened within The Creator and Evolution happened in accordance to the law of The Creator.

Thus labeling people as "Atheist" or any other names / stereotype does not really help.

Many of the so-called "Atheist" are those with "Judaeic influenced" cultural background, such as Judaism, Christianity and Islam where they view their God as a kind of "being" who lived and situated within this universe and not the other way around. (This universe situated inside the God)

That's why their God can get angry, pissed off, demand obedience (as he has no control of it), punished and torture those who disobeyed (like a tyrant), demand offerings (it seems he's not self-fulfilled), demand praise and rituals to honor him (very very insecure and lack of confidence).

If one definition of God as "a being inside this universe", then I might fit the label of "Atheist" as well, as I don't believe in such definition of God.

Judaeic influenced tradition also have a very weird mythology about the creation of human, so this being-like God created human by first creating a lump of clay and then blow his breath and tadaaaa! a human is created!
That's also why they label this first human as Adam, which in their language it mean "soil" or "clay".

To make the myth much weirder, this first human then disobey this being-like God by eating a fruit!
Which caused this being-like God to be pissed off at this first human.
In defense, this first human said that he ate the fruit because he was tricked by the enemy of this being-like God!

So it seems their God has an 'enemy' as well, his enemy is also another being-like God then..
At this stage we can also start to see the inconsistency in their myth, they claim that there's only one God but this God has an enemy! So at least there's two being-like Gods now who are in conflict with each others.

To make the myth more inconsistent, there's another branch of the story which tried to explain the origin of this God's enemy being..  they say after the being-like God created human he asked everyone to bow to the first human and one being refused to do so. Again the being-like God got pissed off and cursed this one being to be his enemy.

Honestly I think their origin myth is one messed up and inconsistent story..
And definitely they don't have any small shred of hard evidence to support their human-origin myth...

Quote
By the way, i am not against evolution, i wouldn't mind evolution but i have heard of issues that has plauged the evolution science such as fossil records.

Like mentioned above, continuously changing is the nature of everything in this universe.
So what one think or attitude about it doesn't matter.
As this universe will continue to change as it's the nature of this universe.
Regardless of one believe or attitude about it.

Fossil records are evidence of such continous change, within the context of carbon based life form inside this planet.
It help to pinpoint which changes happened at which point in time.

Human now try to came up with a kind of time line that described what kind of change happened at which point in time, in this continous changing of carbon based life form inside this planet.
Such task is hard due to the massive scale of changes happened at massive scale of time (millions of years).
That scale of time is massive, in the perspective of human, given human can only live at 100-120 years max.

That's why the 'proposed time-line' is continously being revised as well, as more fossil evidence being found to act as an evidence to build this time line of continous changes within carbon based life form inside this planet.