Welcome Averroes!
sorry to nitpick, but the word of one person does not make something irrefutable proof.
Do not take this as an attack on you, as I am emmensly enjoying this discussion. It makes a great change from the usual.
Once again,
Welcome to the board
Hi,
Well Jinn are beings that are mentioned in the Quran.They are certainly not your arabian nights wish granters.They are just some beings that the Quran addresses alongwith man.Well the quran says that they exist and we don’t really have to worry ourselves with this info 'cos they really have nothing to do with us.They may be imagined like ghosts or something,just that they are a different species made of fire as the quran says man is made of earth.God just wanted to address them too,so he mentioned them.Not that they will grant us our wishes.
Well a point needs to be made.In the Quran are given the reasons God wanted a religion.You should try getting hold of an english translation of the Quran.It is really very simple and easy to understand unlike the bible and it is really fun to read,so see for yourselves whether it is the word of man or the wird of God.I think the word of God justifies that something is the truth.
In the Name of Allah, the most Gracious, the most Merciful.
I never intended the claim of one author to be irrefutable proof. I just wanted to give an example of how the great majority of Western scholars have come to the consensus that the Quran is authentic and unadultered since its revelation to the Prophet. Then again if we agreed that human frailty could have taken place into the Quran, just for the sake of the argument, or the Mohammad was the author of the Quran, then shouldnt we therefore come accross many blatant contradicitions in this Holy Book? Why not apply the acid test to it? Its quite obvious that the Bible contains numerous contradictions. But a divine book from a holy source should contain no trace of descrepancy or contradiction. This is common sense, is it not? The Quran itself bears witness to this, wherein God says:
“Do they not then meditate on the Qur’an? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy.” (4:82)
This book also contains, as we will show shortly, evidence from scientific data and facts that had not been revealed until many centuries after its revelation.
But it would be very useful to prvide a bit of introduction and background before going into the more solid scientific facts. What should be remembered here is that the Quran is not a science text book, and that is not at all what I am trying to say. It does not contain a comprehensive and detailed description of the Universe and nature, with all of the scientific terminology and depth. The Quran is more of a book for moral and ethical code. Its primary goal is to perfect mankind as a whole. The main focus of this Holy Book deals with the metaphysical, the spiritual, and the supernatural aspects of life. But in any case it still does not ignore the material and physical aspects of man and this world.
God sent the Prophet Muhammad, as a messenger to the whole universe. Allah says in the Qur’an:
“We sent thee not, but as a mercy for all creatures.” (Qur’an 21:107).
And so Prophet Muhammad is the Messenger of God to the bedouins in the desert just as he is the Messenger of God to the present-day scientist in his modern laboratory. He is the Messenger of God to all peoples of all times. Before Prophet Muhammad, each Messenger was sent exclusively to his own people:
" …to every people a guide has been sent. "(Qur’an 13:7).
Prophet Muhammad’s message, however, is to all of mankind, and it is for this reason that God has given a supporting proof of the message of Prophet Muhammad; a proof which is different from the proofs given to the messengers before him. The proofs of the preceding messengers were only seen by their contemporaries and possibly by some generations immediately following them. Then God would send a new messenger, supported with a new miracle, in order to revive the faith of his people. But because Prophet Muhammad was destined to be last of the prophets until the Day of Resurrection, God has given him an everlasting miracle as a supporting proof.
If we ask a Jew or Christian to show us the miracles of prophet Musa (Moses) or Isa (Jesus), may the blessings and peace of God be upon them all, they both would submit that it is not within human power to redemonstrate any of those miracles now. Moses’ cane cannot be created nor can prophet Jesus be invoked to raise people from the dead. For us today, these miracles are nothing more than historical reports. But if a Muslim is asked about the greatest miracle of the Prophet Muhammad, he can readily show his book, the Qur’an. For the Qur’an is a miracle that remains in our hands. It is an open book for all people to examine its contents.
God said in the Qur’an:
“What thing is most weighty in evidence? Say: Allah is witness between me and you; this Qur’an has been revealed to me by inspiration that I may warn you and all whom it reaches.” (Qur’an 6:19).
The miraculous nature of the Qur’an lies in the knowledge which it contains. Allah, the Exalted, said:
"But God bears witness to that which He has sent down (the Qur’an)to you (O Muhammad); He has sent it down with His Knowledge… "(Qur’an 4:166).
Hence, our contemporary scientists and scholars, the professors in various universities who are leaders of human thought, have the opportunity to examine the knowledge which is found in the book of God. In this age, scientists have excelled in discovering the universe, though the Qur’an has already discussed the universe and human nature even long before. So, what was the result?
Professor Emeritus Keith Moore is one of the world’s prominent scientists of anatomy and embryology. Professor Moore was asked to give his scientific analysis of some specific Qur’anic verses and prophetic traditions [Ahadeeth] pertaining to his field of specialization.
Professor Moore is the author of the book entitled “The Developing Human”. He is Professor Emeritus of Anatomy and Cell Biology at the University of Toronto, Canada, where he was Associate Dean of Basic Sciences at the Faculty of Medicine and for 8 years was the Chairman of the Department of Anatomy. Dr. Moore had also previously served at the University of Winnipeg, Canada for eleven years. He has headed many international associations of anatomists and the Council of the Union of Biological Sciences. Professor Moore was also elected to the membership of the Royal Medical Association of Canada, the International Academy of Cytology, the Union of American Anatomists and the Union of North and South American Anatomists. and in 1984 he received the most distinguished award presented in the field of anatomy in Canada, the J.C.B. Grant Award from the Canadian Association of Anatomists.
He has published many books on clinical anatomy and embryology, eight of them are used as reference works in medical schools and have been translated into six languages.
When Professor Moore was asked to give his analysis of the Qur’anic verses and prophetic statements, he was amazed. He wondered how the Prophet Muhammad, fourteen centuries ago, could describe the embryo and its development phase in such detail and accuracy, which scientists have come to know only in the last thirty years. Very quickly, however, Professor Moore’s amazement grew into admiration for this revelation and guidance. He introduced these views to intellectual and scientific circles. He even gave a lecture on the compatibility of modern embryology with the Qur’an and Sunnah where he stated:
[q]It has been a great pleasure for me to help clarify statements in the Qur’an about human development. It is clear to me that these statements must have come to Muhammad from Allah, or God, because almost all of this knowledge was not discovered until many centuries later. This proves to me that Muhammad must have been a messenger of Allah.[/q]
Consider what this well-known and respected scientist of embryology declared upon studying the Qur’anic verse related to his discipline, and his conclusion that Muhammad, must have been a Messenger from God.
God says in the Qur’an about the stages of the creation of man:
[q]Man we did create from a quintessence (of clay); Then we placed as (a drop of) sperm (nutfah) in a place firmly fixed; Then we made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood (‘alaqah); Then of that clot we made a (fetus) lump (mudghah); then we made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh; then we developed out of it another creature. (Qur’an 23:12-14).[/q]
The Arabic word ‘alaqah has three meanings. The first meaning is “leech”. The second is “a suspended thing”. The third meaning is “a blood clot”.
In comparing the fresh-water leech to the embryo at the ‘alaqah stage, Professor Moore found a great similarity between the two. He concluded that the embryo during the ‘alaqah stage acquires an appearance very similar to that of leech. Professor Moore placed a picture of the embryo side by side with the picture of a leech (See Fig. 3.1). He presented these pictures to scientists at several conferences.
http://www.it-is-truth.org/images/leech.JPG
In any case if the image I am trying to show doesnt show up, you can easily view it near the end of the page at the following url:
http://www.it-is-truth.org/chapters/stagesa.htm
[Fig. 3.1]
The similarities in appearance between a human embryo and a leech at alaqah stage.
The second meaning of the word ‘alaqah is “a suspended thing”, and this is what we can see in the attachment of the embryo during the ‘alaqah stage to the uterus (womb) of the mother. The third meaning of the word ‘alaqah is “a blood clot”. It is significant to note, as Professor Moore stated, that the embryo during the ‘alaqah stage goes through well known internal events, such as the formation of blood in closed vessels, until the metabolic cycle is completed through placenta. During the ‘alaqah stage, the blood is caught within closed vessels and that is why the embryo acquires the appearance of a blood clot, in addition to the leech-like appearance. Both descriptions are miraculously given by a single Qur’anic word ‘alaqah.
How could Muhammad have possibly known that by himself? Professor Moore also studied the embryo at the mudghah (chewed-like substance) stage. He took a piece of raw clay and chewed it in his mouth, then compared it with a picture of the embryo at the mudghah stage. Professor Moore concluded that the embryo at the mudghah stage acquires the exact appearance of a chewed-like substance. Several Canadian periodicals published many of Professor Moore’s statements. In addition, he presented three television programs in which he highlighted the compatibility of modern science with what has been contained in the Qur’an for one thousand and four hundred years. Consequently, Professor Moore was asked the following question: ‘Does this mean that you believe that the Qur’an is the Word of God?’ to which he replied: “I find no difficulty in accepting this.” Professor Moore was also asked: ‘How can you believe in Muhammad while you believe in Jesus Christ?’ His reply was: I believe they both come from the same school.
Thus modern scientists all over the world today can come to know that the Qur’an has been revealed from God’s knowledge. As God the Almighty has told us:
“God bears witness that what He has sent unto thee He has sent with His (own) knowledge.” (Qur’an 4:166).
It also follows that modern-day scientists should have no difficulty in acknowledging that the Prophet Muhammad is a Messenger of God.
I accept what you where trying to say, buddy.
Cheers for clearing that up.
Averroes,
This hardly seems to be divinely inspired. The various stages of embryonic development were visible, to an extent, due to miscarriages. The descriptions in the Koran that you gave jibe with what would be visible to those examining miscarried fetuses (feti?). You yourself give the meaning of “alaqah” as congealed blood, so why would it matter that the word also means “leech?”
The only part of that passage that does not jibe with what would be visible in a miscarried fetus is the part describing a “lump of bones.” As was mentioned earlier (and as you have yet to address), a fetus does not have its bones clothed with flesh, but rather develops as a lump of flesh that forms bones inside. Why would Allah describe the process of fetal development incorrectly?
On a separate note, the it-is-truth.org web site, at least the portions that I looked at, is pretty basic propoganda. In the embyonic development section, it creates an almost certainly fictional talking straw man, an alleged “western scientist” who reacts to the news of the Quran’s scientific valididty by saying, “No, no, no! What kind of talk is this?” before being shown a couple of (very vague) verses from the Quran that, suuposedly, is centuries ahead of its time. When he protests that it could merely be a coincidence, he is shown, inexplicably, 25 “texts”, and this convinces him that it could not be a coincidence. What are these texts? Why doesn’t any of this make any sense? Go to section VI of the website to decide for yourself. Christian fundamentalists run several sites that are remarkably similar to this, usually trying to prove that evolution is a lie (and that Catholics are going to hell).
Yes, I am, thanks. Why do you ask?
Yer pal,
Satan
I HAVE BEEN SMOKE-FREE FOR:
Three months, three weeks, one day, 11 hours, 56 minutes and 13 seconds.
4539 cigarettes not smoked, saving $567.49.
Life saved: 2 weeks, 1 day, 18 hours, 15 minutes.
Well, speaking as a non-Muslim Westerner who’s learned some Arabic and Persian and studies medieval Islamic mathematics and astronomy, my take on the OP is: no, such claims of “scientific revelation” in the Qur’an are not fundamentally different from those made for the Bible or the Vedas or the I Ching or other premodern religious texts. Medieval Muslim scientists did indeed do a great deal of brilliant work in the sciences, but it wasn’t a “sneak preview” of contemporary quantum mechanics or biology.
For those who are interested in knowing more about actual scientific developments in the Islamic world, check out the History of Islamic Science webpage, which has some good links to references. The Cairo University site is particularly helpful.
Ignoring all the other topics. I really take issue with this. You find incredible hardships placed on women in Hindu India, in other countries around there. Saying that it is because of the religon is misleading at best and downright mendacious otherwise. You can find other examples of the poor treatment of women in Christian Armenia. etc, etc… The Christian religion is used to justify the promisekeepers. Simply because backwards reactonary governments are in place and use religon as a justification for policy, is no reason to single out the religion.
Women were also treated quite badly in “atheist” Stalinist russia.
I jhave already said this, but I feel it bears reiterating, given some recent posts.
Evolution has more than enough evidence to be elevated from “theory” to “law”. The only reason it hasn’t is because nobody’s gotten around to it, and there’s too much blind opposition from creationists…
So whats the purpose of life?It is really easy to refute the claims of the Quran because we did not see God reveal it.I mean it could be a big islamic conspiracy.What i want to ask is why all the fuss?
I told you to read for yourself 'cos i have been part of the “conspiracy” and the islamic conspirers who have fed me nonsense about some book they turned into a bestseller by claiming that it was the book of God.Well it sure worked 'cos i have been duped and then i will burn in hell 'cos i was stupid enough not to realise that i should have belonged to so and so church of so and so county.
Well cya
Zeeshan
Statements referring to human reproduction and development are scattered throughout the Qur’an. It is only recently that the scientific meaning of some of these verses has been appreciated fully. The long delay in interpreting these verses correctly resulted mainly from inaccurate translations and commentaries and from a lack of awareness of scientific knowledge.
Interest in explanations of the verses of the Qur’an is not new. People used to ask the prophet Muhammad all sorts of questions about the meaning of verses referring to human reproduction. The Apostle’s answers form the basis of the Hadith literature.
The translations(*) of the verses from the Qur’an which are interpreted in this paper were provided by Sheik Abdul Majid Zendani, a Professor of Islamic Studies in King Abdulaziz University in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
“He makes you in the wombs of your mothers in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness.”
This statement is from Sura 39:6. We do not know when it was realized that human beings underwent development in the uterus (womb), but the first known illustration of a fetus in the uterus was drawn by Leonardo da Vinci in the 15th century. In the 2nd century A.D., Galen described the placenta and fetal membranes in his book “On The Formation of the Foetus.” Consequently, doctors in the 7th century A.D. likely knew that the human embryo developed in the uterus. It is unlikely that they knew that it developed in stages, even though Aristotle had described the stages of development of the chick embryo in the 4th century B.C. The realization that the human embryo develops in stages was not discussed and illustrated until the 15th century.
After the microscope was discovered in the 17th century by Leeuwenhoek descriptions were made of the early stages of the chick embryo. The staging of human embryos was not described until the 20th century. Streeter (1941) developed the first system of staging which has now been replaced by a more accurate system proposed by O’Rahilly (1972).
“The three veils of darkness” may refer to: (l) the anterior abdominal wall; (2) the uterine wall; and (3) the amniochorionic membrane (Fig. 1). Although there are other interpretations of this statement, the one presented here seems the most logical from an embryological point of view.
Figure 1. Drawing of a sagittal section of a female’s abdomen and pelvis showing a fetus in utero. The “veils of darkness” are: (1) the anterior abdominal wall; (2) the uterine wall, and (3) the amniochorionic membrane.
“Then We placed him as a drop in a place of rest.”
This statement is from Sura 23:13. The drop or nutfah has been interpreted as the sperm or spermatozoon, but a more meaningful interpretation would be the zygote which divides to form a blastocyst which is implanted in the uterus (“a place of rest”). This interpretation is supported by another verse in the Qur’an which states that “a human being is created from a mixed drop.” The zygote forms by the union of a mixture of the sperm and the ovum (“The mixed drop”).
“Then We made the drop into a leech-like structure.”
This statement is from Sura 23:14. The word “alaqah” refers to a leech or bloodsucker. This is an appropriate description of the human embryo from days 7-24 when it clings to the endometrium of the uterus, in the same way that a leech clings to the skin. Just as the leech derives blood from the host, the human embryo derives blood from the decidua or pregnant endometrium. It is remarkable how much the embryo of 23-24 days resembles a leech (Fig. 2). As there were no microscopes or lenses available in the 7th century, doctors would not have known that the human embryo had this leech-like appearance. In the early part of the fourth week, the embryo is just visible to the unaided eye because it is smaller than a kernel of wheat.
Figure 2. Top, a drawing of a leech or bloodsucker.
Below, a drawing of a 24 day-old human embryo. Note the leech-like appearance of the human embryo at this stage.
Figure 3. Left, a plasticine model of the human embryo which has the appearance of chewed flesh.
Right, a drawing of a 28 day-old human embryo showing several bead-like somites which resemble the teeth marks in the model shown to the left.
“Then of that leech-like structure, We made a chewed lump.”
This statement is also from Sura 23:14. The Arabic word “mudghah” means “chewed substance or chewed lump.” Toward the end of the fourth week, the human embryo looks somewhat like a chewed lump of flesh (Fig. 3). The chewed appearance results from the somites which resemble teeth marks. The somites represent the beginnings or primordia of the vertebrae.
“Then We made out of the chewed lump, bones, and clothed the bones in flesh.”
This continuation of Sura 23:14 indicates that out of the chewed lump stage, bones and muscles form. This is in accordance with embryological development. First the bones form as cartilage models and then the muscles (flesh) develop around them from the somatic mesoderm.
“Then We developed out of it another creature.”
This next part of Sura 23:14 implies that the bones and muscles result in the formation of another creature. This may refer to the human-like embryo that forms by the end of the eighth week. At this stage it has distinctive human characteristics and possesses the primordia of all the internal and external organs and parts. After the eighth week, the human embryo is called a fetus. This may be the new creature to which the verse refers.
“And He gave you hearing and sight and feeling and understanding.”
This part of Sura 32:9 indicates that the special senses of hearing, seeing, and feeling develop in this order, which is true. The primordia of the internal ears appear before the beginning of the eyes, and the brain (the site of understanding) differentiates last.
“Then out of a piece of chewed flesh, partly formed and partly unformed.”
This part of Sura 22:5 seems to indicate that the embryo is composed of both differentiated and undifferentiated tissues. For example, when the cartilage bones are differentiated, the embryonic connective tissue or mesenchyme around them is undifferentiated. It later differentiates into the muscles and ligaments attached to the bones.
“And We cause whom We will to rest in the wombs for an appointed term.”
This next part of Sura 22:5 seems to imply that God determines which embryos will remain in the uterus until full term. It is well known that many embryos abort during the first month of development, and that only about 30% of zygotes that form, develop into fetuses that survive until birth. This verse has also been interpreted to mean that God determines whether the embryo will develop into a boy or girl.
The interpretation of the verses in the Qur’an referring to human development would not have been possible in the 7th century A.D., or even a hundred years ago. We can interpret them now because the science of modern Embryology affords us new understanding. Undoubtedly there are other verses in the Qur’an related to human development that will be understood in the future as our knowledge increases.
arrrgh…the pictures didnt come
In the name of Allah, the most Gracious, the most Merciful.
How are you all? I hope fine and well.
The assumption that some people have been making that the evolution “theory” is actually factual and that this is agreed upon by most scientists is a very erroneous statement. It may be true that some scientists, who have a tendecy to be labelled Neo-Darwinists, regard the theory of evolution as a fact, and yet in the same instance we find others who do not and who oppose it. The statement that neo-Darwinism is a science does not mean that it should be regarded as being factual. Science is about learning and gaining knowledge, but it does not mean that the knowledge is complete. Various theories need to be backed up by reproducible observations, before they can be regarded as being realistic. Neo-Darwinism, to this day remains a theory, although some educators prefer to express it as being a fact.
The theory of evolution itself contains many missing links, many unexplained gaps. This is precisely the reason that some scientists have tended to label it as “theory” as oppose to “fact”. A few examples of this are as follows:
“In spite of the great progress made in tracing continuity of evolution within mammalian orders, no fossils have been found bridging the gaps between orders; and this phenomenon is virtually universal.”
(Prof. Julian Huxley reviewing G. G. Simpson’s Tempo and Mode in Evolution, Nature, July 7 1945 pg 4.)
Another quote goes:
“Most palaeontologists would agree that even when the best fossil evidence is available, all but the smallest steps of a lineage are to some extent speculation.” (Sylvester-Bradley at a meeting of the Systematics Association: reported in Nature, March 31st 1951 pg 504)
Now although these sources may seem quite old or out of date, the opinions of many scientists are still in total harmony with what has been said above. In the last 40 years however, many more fossils of so called missing links have been discovered, but they are still a few links in the relatively long evolutionary chain.
And also, here some other quotations and cites from non-Creatonist sources:
“The vast majority of artist’s conceptions are based more on imagination than on evidence…Artists must create something between an ape and a human being; the older the specimen is said to be, the more ape-like they make it.” - “Anthro Art”, Science Digest April 1981 pg 41.
“[There is not] enough evidence from fossil material to take theorising out of the realms of fantasy.” New Scientist August 1972 p 259
“No-one can be sure just what any extinct hominoid looked like.” Donald C Johnson and Maitland A Edey, Lucy: The beginnings of Humankind (1981) p 286.
As recently as 1982 it was reported “The main problem in reconstructing the origins of man is lack of fossil evidence: all there is could be displayed on a dinner table.” - New Scientist 20 May pg 491.
The glass cabinet with the missing link between man and a common ancestor with the apes still remains empty. And so it is indeed very misleading to use your apologetic method of explaining that the issue of evolution is factual and yet scientists are hesitant about publicly and formally admitting this because of fear of their opposition, ie. the Creationists.
Hi,
Well this is interesting.Hey Raven,your thread is really interesting.This is really interesting.I didn’t know that the embryo resembled a leech.Interesting…
Averroes when you posted the evolution theory…i tried to envision it from a skeptical non-muslims point of view.I think you should try to clear up a problem i have been facing.How can you envision cavemen and primitive human beings and Hazrat Adam(SAW).Since he came before them was he advanced or less advanced to them?Also why is the darwin theory so established?I mean our teachers used to tell us that it was false.Muslims and christians alike refuse to accept it because it refutes religion.However the story of Adam and Eve is not new.It was probably stated by every messenger as the beginning.Then how come one person’s(Mr.Darwin’s) “theory” becomes included in every textbook etc. and becomes an accepted fact and the basis of communism and the surge of atheism?
Bye
Zeeshan
Well, I was about to post a comparison of claims of such “scientific revelations” in various scriptural traditions, with a view to illuminating how the so-called “modern embryology” in the Qur’an is a typical modern reinterpretation of a very different medieval worldview, but after Ibn Rushd, excuse me, Averroes’ last post I think I will just drop it and run before the tsunami of informed opinion on evolution gets here. 
Evolution is the basis of neither communism nor atheism.
Evolution is taught in science classes because it is good science. Creation myths are not taught in science classes because they are not good science.
Stating that the fossil record is incomplete does not demonstrate that their are holes in the theory of evolution. Stating that we do not know what Muhammad did every second of his life does not demonstrate that Muhammad did not develop gradually from a child into a man.
If you have a case labeled “missing link” I suggest you fill it with the remains of Homoe Erectus, Australeopithicus, Homo Habilis, etc. All of these species represent “links” etween the common anthropoid ancestor and modern humans.
I am at a loss to figure out what the fact that we do not know exactly what many extinct species looked like is suposed to have to do with evolution. Perhaps you could explain it to me.
It is true that some scientists do not believe evolution is a sound theory. It is also true that some Muslims believe that women should be prevented from exercising any autonomy in their lives. Are we to judge groups according to the attitudes of their fringe elements?
**
Not true at all. The Theory (no quotation marks needed at all) of Evolution is just as accepted by the scientific community as the Theory of Gravity.
**
While scientists may debate exactly the nuances of what happened, and how some things happened, there is no doubt that evolution did, in fact, happen.
**
The evidence - a large, huge, gigantic, amazingly massive mountain of it - all points to evolution. There is no evidence which says otherwise. Period.
**
You are so mistaken, I can’t figure out how to respond to this without looking for sharp objects.
I don’t even know what neo-Darwnism IS!!!
And you obviously don’t know that a scientific theory IS a fact as far as science can say.
**
AAAAAAGGGHHHH!!!
Please tell me what a missing link is?
**
Okay, I am glad to see that not only do fundamentalist Christians feel the need to delude themselves into thinking they know what science is about.
I only pray to Allah that, much like Christianity and Judaism, one needn’t cut themselves off from reality and try and make up “facts” to fit into ancient texts. That someone can be a Muslim and realize that we evolved.
Please tell me this is true. Please tell me that, just as a Christian can see Genesis as a parable and NOT real science that a Muslim can as well? Please tell me that you are in the minority? PLEASE?!? I am begging here…
Now, instead of taking a few quotes out of context, how about visiting The Talk.Origins Archive which takes on everything you would assert and shows it for the non-factual rhetoric it is.
Here’s the deal, sparky: I wanted you to come here to tell us about the Koran, not to give us science lessons. Theoretically, you know about the Koran - You have shown in this error-laden post that you know nothing about science.
As you would probably not wish to have myself tell you what the Koran was all about, how about saving the science lessons for those who understand the subject matter, 'k?
Yer pal,
Satan
I HAVE BEEN SMOKE-FREE FOR:
Three months, three weeks, one day, 20 hours, 44 minutes and 14 seconds.
4554 cigarettes not smoked, saving $569.32.
Life saved: 2 weeks, 1 day, 19 hours, 30 minutes.
Satan: *Please tell me this is true. Please tell me that, just as a Christian can see Genesis as a parable and NOT real science that a Muslim can as well? Please tell me that you are in the minority? PLEASE?!? I am begging here… *
Wow, Satan is begging for knowledge that I happen to have…hmm, I should cut myself a deal here, and none of that selling-my-soul nonsense either!
Well, Satan old enemy, I got good news and I got bad news. Yes, there are many “literal-interpretation” Muslims who feel that the Qur’an contradicts the idea of human evolution: the relevant suras are presented here, for example. However, there is a nice article at talkorigins, of all places, presenting an evolutionist view of Islamic theology. I would guess that Muslims split along about the same lines and in the same proportions as Christians when it comes to the various degrees of acceptance of evolution.
(For those who are wandering around Muslim sites for the first time in consequence of these recent threads, a helpful hint: the parenthetical remark “PBUH” after a name stands for “peace be upon him/her.” Bet you’d have figured it out for yourself. :))
Firstly, I am Abbas. I am a boy, not a Man. I am Brittish, not English. I am pessimistic yet optimistic. I am big boned, but not fat. I am 18, but I’m still little. I am a people person, not a social person. I love chiken, but I hate beef. :rolleyes:
My friend Averrose suggested that i join Straight Dope due to the nature of the discussions going on here. After debating with the hyper intensive gits on another BB board namely the Junction i had enough.
I am happy however to see nice debates going on here with open minded people involved. I am a Muslim, always learning and seeking out answers to various things. I hope to join in on these discussions answering, learning, sharing and hopefuly attaining a general all round good understanding between us.
Bring forth the welcomes. !!! 