Evolution or Intelligent design ?

Ahmad_Bilal

Peace.

I've asked this question before in another thread, but it was never answered...

When the Qur'aan conflicts with the given positions of modern science, which position should we uphold? Should we accept the Qur'aanic viewpoint, which (seemingly) conflicts with reality? Or should we acknowledge that the Qur'aan may be wrong about some things and adopt the scientific (realistic) viewpoint?

To cite one example, the Qur'aan implies that the sun sets in a 'muddy spring', or 'murky water' (Q. 1886). In the 14th century, it was common for people to accept this as reality. However, in today's world, in which scientific advancement and understanding is prevalent, we know that this concept is completely ridiculous. In other places, the Qur'aan proposes the concept of a 'flat earth' (e.g. Q. 1847; 2053; 4310; 786), and it even attempts to verify this position by stating that, due to ALLAH's power over celestial objects, the 'sun never overtakes the moon' (Q. 3640). Again, today, we know that this concept is ridiculous. Many people have recently attempted to reconcile their religious ideologies with the Qur'aan, generally by trying to shape their knowledge of science around their belief. In other words, they allege that, even though the Qur'aan uses those specific references and descriptions, that's not "really" what it's saying. Yet, the wording is very clear.

Which position should we uphold? When the Qur'aan conflicts with modern science, are we willing to admit that the Qur'aan may be wrong on some things? Or should we adopt the (generally accepted Islamic) position that the Qur'aan is completely correct and modern science simply hasn't 'caught up' with it?

Peace,

Ahmad

good_logic

Peace Ahmed.

Everything you quoted about Qoran in your last post was " Mistranslated". There is no conflict between Qoran and true Science.

Peace.

StopS

Peace Ahmed.

Everything you quoted about Qoran in your last post was " Mistranslated". There is no conflict between Qoran and true Science.

Peace.

Are you willing to "re-translate" and rewrite extensive parts of the Koran? I can bring up hundreds of instances where reality and the Koran present a problem. There's a site which comments every line of religious books like the Bible, the Mormon book, Koran. You can read the pages regarding the Koran and see the huge volume of lines we are talking about. http//skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/index.htm

Don't go if you are easily offended.

good_logic

Peace StopS.

I have seen/read worse from people who are confused and their language/translations/understanding are even more confused than they are!

Like I said before,what is clear to some is foggy to others and what is truth to some is falsehood to others.

Do you really want to know the truth or is your mind made up and you have other aim/s?

All I can add is the following

22 17 ? Those who believe, those who are Jewish, the Converts ( to any religion), the Christians, the Zoroastrians ( and any name you wish to give to man s religion) and the idol worshippers ( and the Muslims, Hindus, the thousands of religious sects, the disbelievers, the Atheists, etc?) GOD is the one who will judge among them on the day of Resurrection. GOD witnesses all things.?

What more can I say?

Peace.

hawk99

Peace StopS.

I have seen/read worse from people who are confused and their language/translations/understanding are even more confused than they are!

Like I said before,what is clear to some is foggy to others and what is truth to some is falsehood to others.

Do you really want to know the truth or is your mind made up and you have other aim/s?

All I can add is the following

22 17 Those who believe, those who are Jewish, the Converts ( to any religion), the Christians, the Zoroastrians ( and any name you wish to give to man s religion) and the idol worshippers ( and the Muslims, Hindus, the thousands of religious sects, the disbelievers, the Atheists, etc&#133 GOD is the one who will judge among them on the day of Resurrection. GOD witnesses all things.

What more can I say?

Peace.

Agreed

109.006
Lakum deenukum waliya deeni
YUSUFALI To you be your Way, and to me mine.
PICKTHAL Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion.
SHAKIR You shall have your religion and I shall have my religion.
KHALIFA "To you is your religion, and to me is my religion."

Muslims have to give up when it is determined that a person is kaffir.

KHALIFA If their rejection gets to be too much for you, you should know that even if you dug a tunnel through the earth, or climbed a ladder into the sky, and produced a miracle for them (they still would not believe). Had GOD willed, He could have guided them, unanimously. Therefore, do not behave like the ignorant ones.

Peace

StopS

I have seen/read worse from people who are confused and their language/translations/understanding are even more confused than they are!
What more can I say?

You are still making one mistake in my opinion you are mistaking me for someone who tries to insinuate something bad or tries to prove something about Islam.

I don't. It is not for me to judge a person's belief. Whether they believe astrology or palmistry is significant is their business. The same goes for any of the larger 200 different belief systems we have today. Because I live in and am exposed to an Islamic environment I am more interested in it and want to understand it.

Again out of all the 100s of different sections of Islam I find the Koranist one the most convincing and straight. Well, mostly, because 19 is not exactly straight and pseudo mathematical. But I get cranky if anyone tries to drag any religion into the area and under the spotlight of science. That does not work. I get livid if anyone tries to make any pseudo-scientific claims and involves the Koran in this. I find it patently dishonest and false. That's why I sometimes come off as shrill and strident and that's when my sarcasm comes through as well as my derision.

As I have said in my intro, I ask and probe.

good_logic

Peace StopS.

Quote You are still making one mistake in my opinion you are mistaking me for someone who tries to insinuate something bad or tries to prove something about Islam.

Remember me saying to you, I have hope that you may become a believer?

I meant it. I do not give up on anyone , including myself. The Lord works individually with all of us. He is the only one who knows our innermost thoughts.

God bless.

Peace.

Ahmad_Bilal

Peace, good logic.

You said,

Everything you quoted about Qoran in your last post was " Mistranslated". There is no conflict between Qoran and true Science.

Would you be willing to retranslate the stated verses to reflect what they actually say, as you allege that they agree with modern science?

For the record, when I study the passages of the Qur'aan and compare them to modern science, I'm not merely basing my estimations on specific translations. Rather, I initially read the passage in Arabic, so that I can form my own basic interpretation of the scripture. Afterwards, I check out various translations to see what others have determined the passages to say.

In addition, you failed to answer my questions. I'll repost them for you, in case you missed them

When the Qur'aan conflicts with the given positions of modern science, which position should we uphold? Should we accept the Qur'aanic viewpoint, which (seemingly) conflicts with reality? Or should we acknowledge that the Qur'aan may be wrong about some things and adopt the scientific (realistic) viewpoint?

Thanks in advance.

Peace,

Ahmad

StopS

Peace StopS.

Quote You are still making one mistake in my opinion you are mistaking me for someone who tries to insinuate something bad or tries to prove something about Islam.

Remember me saying to you, I have hope that you may become a believer?

I meant it. I do not give up on anyone , including myself. The Lord works individually with all of us. He is the only one who knows our innermost thoughts.

God bless.

Peace.

Hahaha, ok.

Unfortunately, the only way to find out is to die.

one-9-one

for me to judge a person's belief.

interesting. can you explain.

Student_of_Allah

Shalom Aleikhem,

First of all, let me apologize for this late response.

Now,

No it doesn't, but my problem was how could God model life in a way that justifies racism?

Evolution does not "justify" racism or even "universal brotherhood". It is up to you and me to decide what we do. Let me give you something else to think about. Do you agree that there are tall and short people ? Do you agree that some people are more attractive than others ? If you do agree that it is the case, would you now go on and and say that " but my problem was how could God create people in a way that justifies looking down upon the less desirable ones" ? I hope not. In the same way, even if we can demonstrate that I am weaker than you, we should not therefore say that you have the right to mistreat me. Like I said before, it is evidently true that shit and people are both made out of the same sub atomic particles. However, we know better than to treat people like shit.

"favored races" is interchangeable with "white" in this context

Once again, I have to remind you that "races" can very well mean variations. You said you have read "Origin of Species". Let me demonstrate that from Chapter 1

".................. Nevertheless, as our varieties certainly do occasionally revert in some of their characters to ancestral forms, it seems to me not improbable, that if we could succeed in naturalising, or were to cultivate, during many generations, the several races, for instance, of the cabbage, in very poor soil (in which case, however, some effect would have to be attributed to the direct action of the poor soil),....................."

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes ... will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the Negro or Australian and the gorilla (Darwin 1887156).

Ok, here is the full passage

"The great break in the organic chain between man and his nearest allies, which cannot be bridged over by any extinct or living species, has often been advanced as a grave objection to the belief that man is descended from some lower form; but this objection will not appear of much weight to those who, convinced by general reasons, believe in the general principle of evolution. Breaks incessantly occur in all parts of the series, some being wide, sharp and defined, others less so in various degrees; as between the orang and its nearest allies?between the Tarsius and the other Lemurid? ?between the elephant and in a more striking manner between the Ornithorhynchus or Echidna, and other mammals. But all these breaks depend merely on the number of related forms which have become extinct. At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla. "

Although the passage is more about taxonomy, I can not help but point out that while defending his theory, he ignored things like genetics, nature VS nurture. His idea was that a culture can end up forcing extinction on another culture. Darwin had to explain what he observed, do yourself the favor of looking at the world he looked at. You will understand why some of his conclusions were not correct. By the way, Darwin was not proposing the extermination or ill-treatment of any race. He was, as I said before, describing what he observed. Just like I can write about a "Tiger vs Deer" situation without passing on any moral judgement on the matter. Now, I do not know if Darwin was a racist or not. However, even if Darwin comes back from his grave and states that " I am a racist and the theory of evolution made me racist", that has no bearing on the truth of the subject matter of "Evolution".

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

Student_of_Allah

Shalom Aleikhem,

A reminder for everyone

Let us have off-topic conversations and debates elsewhere. This thread is for discussing the theory of evolution and intelligent design.