Mohamed Shah Qadri
sunniport user
Can someone please send a strong refutation of the theory of evolution
Evolution
- Thread starter Mohamed Shah Qadri
- Start date
Juwayni
sunniport user
As Salāmu ʿAlaykum,
Not a scholar myself but have studied biology at the undergraduate level. For those ʿUlama and students of knowledge wanting to address this, here are some relevant considerations for the debate at hand.
- Many of the evolutionary theorists are naturalists and thus believe in naturalistic evolution. What this means is that they do not believe in The Creator (ʿAzza Wa Jall) and instead believe the universe arose itself, and the living beings in it arose from random mutations over time. They believe this to be the case for humans, plants, bacteria/archaea and animals.
- Some people believe in evolution as being brought about by The Creator (ʿAzza Wa Jall), and in this there would be two groups:
A. The group that believes that both humans and animals and other lifeforms on Earth arose from a common-ancestor over millions of years, that is to say they believe mankind descended from a non-human species.
B. This group believes that humans were created as mentioned in the Qur'ān al-Karīm, but for animals and plants and other physical lifeforms, these may have been created such that over time it appears one species (of non-human physical lifeform) 'evolved' into others. They affirm that this too would be with the Will and Power of Allāh (ʿAzza Wa Jall), who is the creator of all these lifeforms.
B. This group believes that humans were created as mentioned in the Qur'ān al-Karīm, but for animals and plants and other physical lifeforms, these may have been created such that over time it appears one species (of non-human physical lifeform) 'evolved' into others. They affirm that this too would be with the Will and Power of Allāh (ʿAzza Wa Jall), who is the creator of all these lifeforms.
It would be nice if there was a an answer to some coronary questions:
- What is the Islamic position on 'randomness'.
- What is the ruling on someone believing or holding it to be possible that humans 'evolved' (developed adaptations to their specific environment such as more hair in cold climates) into their present form after they were created as mentioned in the Qur'ān, again by the Will of Allāh and not independently? That is to say, this person believes over dozens of generations in living in particular place, the people of that place begin to develop traits to help them better cope with that environment.
Unbeknown
sunniport user
An excellent intro to the core problems with Darwin's theory - in simple layperson terms it helps appreciate the impossibility of the origin of species via evolution.
The second half is interesting from the societal pov - and quite revealing.
warning: as would be expected, there are a few kufric statements/asides made by the speakers - so be careful when they touch on theology
The second half is interesting from the societal pov - and quite revealing.
warning: as would be expected, there are a few kufric statements/asides made by the speakers - so be careful when they touch on theology
Interesting series of talks by various speaker. This one was an interesting perspective in evolution which may change some minds...
https://youtu.be/9XpIz2T6Ql0
https://youtu.be/9XpIz2T6Ql0
Unbeknown
sunniport user
tl;dw
I had posted his paper in another thread (last week).
Does this video have a different summary to what I have gathered?
Unbeknown
sunniport user
I hope no one changes their minds about this ...
Next thing we know, another doctor will crawl out of the woodwork and argue that Muslims can believe in infinite and eternal, multiverses, existing since pre-eternity.
wal 'iyadu bi Allah
Interesting , the man’s confession on the issue (at 11:27) reminded me of Imam Shafi’s رضى الله عنه couplet :
كلما أدّبني الدهر أراني نقص عقلي و كلما ازددت علما زادني علما بجهلي
SaadSohail
sunniport user
The evolution of the first group who are naturalists is a rational impossibility (Muhal Aqlan). You cannot have infinite series of changes in the past. You also cannot have a first event without a Specifier (Tarjih Bila Murajih).
So those who believe that evolution in this terms are entertaining rational absurdities because they are violating the law of non-contradiction.
As for the second group (Group A who believe that humans descended from non-human species by the will and decree of Allah) we take a different line of reasoning to refute them. Why?
Because we cannot show in this case that "humans descending from non-human" species is a rational absurdity. The judgement of the mind concludes that this is rationally possible.
Saying it is a rational possibility DOES NOT mean that this is something that "happened". To prove that it happened one would need evidence. For e.g the existence of a unicorn is a rational possibility. Saying it is a rational possibility doesnot mean it exists. You would need evidence to prove that it exists.
What is the evidence of those who believe "Humans descended from non-human species by the Will of Allah?"
They have 0 credible evidence. Nothing to prove or substantiate their claim.
We go ahead and ask "What is the best evidence they could ever provide?"
An experiment on a lab monkey giving a birth to a human.
But that would still not prove that humans descended from non-human species in the past. Because it is a claim about history/past and one cannot go into the past to see/observe it. What this experiment at "most" would prove is that "humans could have descended from non-human species" NOT that "humans descended from non-human species". This does not provide certainty at all. The mind already judged that such a proposition is rationally possible. The experiment would at best show that it is "possible". So what have we gained? Nothing.
On the other hand, we have proofs for the fact that humans DID NOT descend from non-human species based on sound rational reasoning. It comes to back to proving:
1) That a Creator exists.
2) Prophet Mohammad (ʿalayhi s-salām) is the messenger of Allah.
3) Quran is the word of Allah.
4) It is rationally impossible for a Allah to tell a lie.
5) It is rationally impossible for a Prophet to tell a lie.
This group A contradicts the apparant verses of the Quran,the hadith and the ijma of the scholars of the last 1400 years.
What is the Islamic position on 'randomness'?
If by randomness you meant an event without a prior correlating event then this is rationally possible. Allah could have willed an event without a prior correlating event e.g Quantum fluctuations.
If by randomness you meant things coming into existence:
1)Without a specifier. Then this is rationally impossible because it violates the law of non-contradiction.
2) By other contingent things: Then this is rationally impossible because it leads to infinite regress.
What is the ruling on someone believing or holding it to be possible that humans 'evolved' (developed adaptations to their specific environment such as more hair in cold climates) into their present form after they were created as mentioned in the Qur'ān, again by the Will of Allāh and not independently? That is to say, this person believes over dozens of generations in living in particular place, the people of that place begin to develop traits to help them better cope with that environment.
Deviance of the highest degree. And Kufr.
P.S
1)The line of reasoning used to refute Group A is the same reasoning adopted by Shaykh Abu Adam. It is very good article and I would recommend brothers to give it a read.
2)With regards to Group B. Again it comes down to what kind of evidence they have in support of their claims. They have no evidence to prove their claim. With regards to the ruling on Group B, I have to ask.
Last edited:
i don't have any strong feelings either way and but can you kindly elaborate on which issues you specifically feel the doc's view contradicts the shari'ah and why.
Unbeknown
sunniport user
sorry no time - people will have to figure it out for themselves.
In one line, all the reports about pre-Adamic earth being bereft of humans have been conveniently ignored and a new species introduced just to agree with evolutionists - and then a pairing between them is assumed to some how make modern humans "fit-in" both categories - to keep everyone happy.
This leads to the real ancestors of not just commoners like us - but even Prophets (peace be upon them all) - turn out to be monkeys and further upstream - amoeboid creatures.
Afterall, everything was going fine and dandy, evolution was shaping things and just when homo sapiens came about - " God suddenly injected Adam into the picture ".
And NOW the takleef starts - why?
Unbeknown
sunniport user
My Debate With an ‘Intelligent Design’ Theorist
The guy turned up under prepared, thinking that just repeating "evolution is proven by science" like a litany should be sufficient to scare off skeptical demons-that-be, and so, was unable to counter his opponent's argument with rigorous data or logic.
As per him, when you debate about evolution, you are really trying to prove that two and two makes four, and as such you need nothing more than your fingers for the 'demonstration' - rather than logarithmic charts and calculus tables.
As was expected, the other side noted his nonchalance, and spared no ink in pointing it out.
And now the guy is moping..
The guy turned up under prepared, thinking that just repeating "evolution is proven by science" like a litany should be sufficient to scare off skeptical demons-that-be, and so, was unable to counter his opponent's argument with rigorous data or logic.
As per him, when you debate about evolution, you are really trying to prove that two and two makes four, and as such you need nothing more than your fingers for the 'demonstration' - rather than logarithmic charts and calculus tables.
As was expected, the other side noted his nonchalance, and spared no ink in pointing it out.
And now the guy is moping..
Unbeknown
sunniport user
Unbeknown
sunniport user
@faqir posted a video of an "interesting perspective":
to which I replied:
In response he asked me to substantiate - what I found wrong in jalajel's paper
I excused myself
well here's something for you @faqir
Yaqeen Institute Promotes Evolution of Humanity from Apes
--
I found you initial suggestion about "changing minds" nothing short of flippancy - and your subsequent nonchalant statement that you "did not have string feelings either way" was a dangerous confession ... however, I let it pass thinking you might have had something different in your mind.
Can you be frank and let us know if (besides being a devbandi sympathizer) you are also a liberal like the current yaqeen lot?
to which I replied:
In response he asked me to substantiate - what I found wrong in jalajel's paper
I excused myself
well here's something for you @faqir
Yaqeen Institute Promotes Evolution of Humanity from Apes
--
I found you initial suggestion about "changing minds" nothing short of flippancy - and your subsequent nonchalant statement that you "did not have string feelings either way" was a dangerous confession ... however, I let it pass thinking you might have had something different in your mind.
Can you be frank and let us know if (besides being a devbandi sympathizer) you are also a liberal like the current yaqeen lot?
Unbeknown
sunniport user
a truly hilarious review of yaqeen's evolution madness
just consider what an irreverent imbecile this doctor jimjam is.
and now that I finally heared him expound on his award winning paper, I am astounded that someone like @faqir (who is familiar with sunni aqaid) posted it here with an off-handed quip instead of a disclaimer or warning for Sunnis to be wary of - if nothing - at least the despicable language being used.
--
as we always say - stick to alahazrat or you will be blown away ...
just consider what an irreverent imbecile this doctor jimjam is.
and now that I finally heared him expound on his award winning paper, I am astounded that someone like @faqir (who is familiar with sunni aqaid) posted it here with an off-handed quip instead of a disclaimer or warning for Sunnis to be wary of - if nothing - at least the despicable language being used.
--
as we always say - stick to alahazrat or you will be blown away ...
I just randomly listened from 25:00 to 26:00 minutes and the monkey says that Islamic theology always classified humans as hayavan (being animated) and that the greeks also had a concept of hayavan natiq (a thinking animal). that one minute was enough for me.
Unbeknown
sunniport user
James Tour (official website)
His page on Discovery Institute (the main foundation backing the theory of ID):
James Tour is the T. T. and W. F. Chao Professor of Chemistry, Professor of Computer Science, and Professor of Materials Science and Nano-Engineering at Rice University. A synthetic organic chemist, he received his BS in Chemistry from Syracuse University, his PhD in synthetic organic and organometallic chemistry from Purdue University, and postdoctoral training in synthetic organic chemistry at the University of Wisconsin and Stanford University. He has served on the faculty of the University of South Carolina and as a visiting scholar at Harvard University.
Tour has over 700 research publications and over 130 patent families.
He was inducted into the National Academy of Inventors in 2015 and was listed in “The World’s Most Influential Scientific Minds” by Thomson Reuters in 2014. He has been named “Scientist of the Year” by R&D Magazine and was ranked one of the Top 10 chemists in the world over the past decade by a Thomson Reuters citations per publication index survey in 2009. The same year he was elected a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). He won the Feynman Prize in Experimental Nanotechnology in 2008, the NASA Space Act Award in 2008 for his development of carbon nanotube reinforced elastomers, and the Arthur C. Cope Scholar Award from the American Chemical Society for his achievements in organic chemistry in 2007.
--
definitely one of the heavyweights throwing his weight behind ID - which makes one wonder at these "Evolutionary Muslims" ...
His page on Discovery Institute (the main foundation backing the theory of ID):
James Tour is the T. T. and W. F. Chao Professor of Chemistry, Professor of Computer Science, and Professor of Materials Science and Nano-Engineering at Rice University. A synthetic organic chemist, he received his BS in Chemistry from Syracuse University, his PhD in synthetic organic and organometallic chemistry from Purdue University, and postdoctoral training in synthetic organic chemistry at the University of Wisconsin and Stanford University. He has served on the faculty of the University of South Carolina and as a visiting scholar at Harvard University.
Tour has over 700 research publications and over 130 patent families.
He was inducted into the National Academy of Inventors in 2015 and was listed in “The World’s Most Influential Scientific Minds” by Thomson Reuters in 2014. He has been named “Scientist of the Year” by R&D Magazine and was ranked one of the Top 10 chemists in the world over the past decade by a Thomson Reuters citations per publication index survey in 2009. The same year he was elected a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). He won the Feynman Prize in Experimental Nanotechnology in 2008, the NASA Space Act Award in 2008 for his development of carbon nanotube reinforced elastomers, and the Arthur C. Cope Scholar Award from the American Chemical Society for his achievements in organic chemistry in 2007.
--
definitely one of the heavyweights throwing his weight behind ID - which makes one wonder at these "Evolutionary Muslims" ...