Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - abdullah

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9
« on: September 21, 2013, 08:00:49 PM »
Its obvious what he meant to say. No need to point out his error

GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: I need your opinion please!
« on: September 12, 2013, 12:31:00 AM »

GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: I need your opinion please!
« on: September 10, 2013, 11:11:32 PM »
Assalamualykum brother
Based on the verses you have shown 1) I believe that evolution of humans does not contradict the Qur'an 2) I also don't believe that evolution is necessary to interpret the verses you selected.
Alright throwing doubt over the ahadith is one thing, but to throw doubt over the sunnah is tantamount to rejecting the Qur'an for two reasons. 1) The Sunnah just like Qur'an has been passed on from generation to generation  with too much people passing it on for any falsehood to enter it. 2) It would only be logical to assume that Allah protected the sunnah because that is how we practice the religion.

Here are some of the arguments I found against evolution.

Visit the link above I realized after I posted the article it is hard to read.

Lack of a viable mechanism for producing high levels of complex and specified information. Related to this are problems with the Darwinian mechanism producing irreducibly complex features, and the problems of non-functional or deleterious intermediate stages. (For details see: "The NCSE, Judge Jones, and Bluffs About the Origin of New Functional Genetic Information," "Do Car Engines Run on Lugnuts? A Response to Ken Miller & Judge Jones's Straw Tests of Irreducible Complexity for the Bacterial Flagellum," "Opening Darwin's Black Box," or "Can Random Mutations Create New Complex Features? A Response to TalkOrigins"); The failure of the fossil record to provide support for Darwinian evolution. (For details, see "Punctuated Equilibrium and Patterns from the Fossil Record" or "Intelligent Design Has Scientific Merit in Paleontology"); The failure of molecular biology to provide evidence for a grand "tree of life." (For details, see: "A Primer on the Tree of Life"); Natural selection is an extremely inefficient method of spreading traits in populations unless a trait has an extremely high selection coefficient; The problem that convergent evolution appears rampant -- at both the genetic and morphological levels, even though under Darwinian theory this is highly unlikely. (For details, see "Convergent Genetic Evolution: 'Surprising' Under Unguided Evolution, Expected Under Intelligent Design" and "Dolphins and Porpoises and...Bats? Oh My! Evolution's Convergence Problem"); The failure of chemistry to explain the origin of the genetic code. (For details, see "The origin of life remains a mystery" or "Problems with the Natural Chemical 'Origin of Life'"); The failure of developmental biology to explain why vertebrate embryos diverge from the beginning of development. (For details, see: "Evolving views of embryology," "A Reply to Carl Zimmer on Embryology and Developmental Biology," "Current Textbooks Misuse Embryology to Argue for Evolution"); The failure of neo-Darwinian evolution to explain the biogeographical distribution of many species. (For details, see "Sea Monkey Hypotheses Refute the NCSE's Biogeography Objections to Explore Evolution" or "Sea Monkeys Are the Tip of the Iceberg: More Biogeographical Conundrums for Neo-Darwinism"); A long history of inaccurate predictions inspired by neo-Darwinism regarding vestigial organs or so-called "junk" DNA. (For details, ] see: "Intelligent Design and the Death of the 'Junk-DNA' Neo-Darwinian Paradigm," "The Latest Proof of Evolution: The Appendix Has No Important Function," or "Does Darrel Falk's Junk DNA Argument for Common Descent Commit 'One of the Biggest Mistakes in the History of Molecular Biology'?); Humans show many behavioral and cognitive traits and abilities that offer no apparent survival advantage (e.g. music, art, religion, ability to ponder the nature of the universe). - See more at:

GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: I need your opinion please!
« on: September 08, 2013, 11:25:06 PM »
Here is evidence that Darwinists suppress any information that goes against the theory of evolution no matter how strong or weak the evidence is. This is why we shouldnt try to force in evolution in to the quran. For all we know evolution can be completely disproven within 50 years. 100 years ago everybody but thiests believed  in the static state model of the universe which was then completely disproven in 1920.

GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: I need your opinion please!
« on: September 08, 2013, 07:22:16 PM »
Here is an example of an evolutionary hoax
The irony of this evolution debate is that majority of the people who believe in evolution do so out of the testimony of others, namely our teachers at school or the books we read, because we haven’t done the experiments ourselves. This is no different than a new form of priesthood – the scientific priesthood! But we must be wary, teachers and scientists and priests are human beings, and humans err. For example Marc Hauser, a Harvard professor of biology, was found guilty of misconduct as he invented and falsified data in experiments on monkeys. This was not detected by peer reviewers but by a student whistleblower. Hauser, an atheist, authored the book Moral Minds: The Nature of Right and Wrong in which he claims morality is an inherited instinct and that atheists are just as ethical as churchgoers.[34] The point being made here is that although we must respect scientists and teachers, we should not do so blindly. Rather, we must always understand knowledge and claims of truth from an epistemological perspective, meaning does this knowledge have the right to claim certainty? By understanding the scientific method and its philosophy we can easily conclude that it is a blessing and mercy from God, but it does not – most of the time – produce certain knowledge.

GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: I need your opinion please!
« on: September 08, 2013, 06:05:53 PM »
Ayy guys chill out he is only sharing his opinion on a theory which he holds to be true their is absolutely no need to react harshly. If we just show him why we don't believe in evolution it will lead to more fruitful and positive discussion. This is what Islam needs in this era, when we have pseudo-Muslims such as irshad menji and Reza aslan representing Islam we need a strong intellectual response to their fallacious beliefs and the only way to do that is with intellectual arguments.

GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: I need your opinion please!
« on: September 08, 2013, 05:52:56 PM »
My point about the similarity in genetics is that similarity does not necessarily entail  evolution.
I am not well versed in the study of evolution because in all honesty I find it extremely boring and unlikely. My point is that their are other ways of viewing the scientific data you have mentioned.
Also a note on the examples you pointed out, correct me if I'm wrong but these all seem like instances of micro evolution

GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: I need your opinion please!
« on: September 08, 2013, 03:43:46 PM »
Brother their have been evolution hoaxes this is not wishful thinking on the part of black muslim.
Both of yall need to chill out their is no need to be so rude to each other we are all Muslims that are disagreeing on minor issues. Emotions and ad hominens have no place in an intellectual debate.
Prophet Musa was ordered by Allah to speak kindly to phirawn, the worst of people. We are all brothers and their is absolutely no need to be rude to each other.
Inshallah I will respond to all of your points at a later date as I am busy at the moment.

GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: I need your opinion please!
« on: September 08, 2013, 03:00:04 PM »
Brother, I believe that evolution of animals is possible I just haven't found the evidence for evolution to be very convincing.
Evolution is just one interpretation of the scientific data proofs you have presented. For example, evolutionists see the genetic, molecular, embryological, and protein similarities as proof of evolution. While a creationist can easily argue that god would use the same blueprints to make all of his creation.
Also, a note on "vestigial organs" just because we don't know what the purpose of an organ doesn't necessarily mean that it is vestigial. For example scientists use to believe that the appendix was a vestigial organ, but they recently discovered that it's purpose is to store good bacteria.
you cited fossil evidence as one of your proofs but I would argue that the fossil evidence isn't nessecarily in favor of evolution because of the absence of transitional fossils.

GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: I need your opinion please!
« on: September 08, 2013, 12:50:44 PM »
Brother, you should realize that evolution is based on a weak philosophy. It is the idea that the only way to establish truth is from science.
This fails because science can't explain how life came from non life, how humans are conscious, what came before the big bang,etc...

GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: I need your opinion please!
« on: September 08, 2013, 11:48:47 AM »
Theological debate on evolution

No problem Akhi, I think we need we need more articles like these: well researched, well written, and concise.

GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: An advice to brother Osama
« on: August 31, 2013, 09:40:33 AM »
but the way i see it is that a muslim can either choose to accept or reject the hadith as it doesn't effect our faith or the laws of Islam.

A very wrong statement I must say ! How will you prayif you don't accept Hadith for example ? How can you say it doesn't affect faith while Allah orders us to follow the teachings of the prophet peace upon him which are from Allah by the way ?

I was referring to the hadith about the bewitchment of the prophet (SAWS). I am not a hadith rejecter.

Assalamualykum I recently came across this comment about if the quran claims the earth is flat or round. It is by far the best rebuttal to the anti-islamic polemicists.

"In addition to 18:86, they claim that 71:19, which says that God made the earth an expanse (wallahu ja'ala lakumu l-arda bisatan), implies a flat earth. However, the word bisatan means expanse, not flat. They apparently were asleep in kindergarten when the teacher went over shapes and sizes. Flat is a shape. Expansive is a size. For example, a piece of paper is flat, but not expansive. The earth is expansive, but not flat. They make the same mistake in translating and interpreting 51:48, which says that God made the earth expansive (farashnaha).

Curiously, they even cite 79:30 as evidence that the Quran says the earth is flat, even though it says the exact opposite (that the earth is shperical). 79:30 says, according to them, "and the earth, after that, He flattened it, and/or, and the earth, after that, He made it flat" (wa l-arda ba'da dhalika dahaha). They claim the word daha comes from the root for an Arabian ostrich's nest (madahy). According to them, the (now extinct) Arabian ostrich would flatten the ground before it layed it's eggs. Thus, they claim that dahaha means that He (God) flattened the earth like an Arabian ostrich flattens the ground before laying its eggs. However, the linguist, Prof. Martha Schulte-Nafeh, points out in her translation that the word daha also comes from the same root for the ostrich egg itself (dahyah). She points out that in the Libyan dialect, they still sometimes use the word dahyah for egg in addition to the more frequently used word baydah. Thus, she translates dahaha as "He made it egg-shaped". Now, take a look at this painting of an Arabian ostrich's nest from al-Jahiz's 9th century book on animals, "kitab al-hayawan":

Does the nest (madahy) look "flat" to you? The eggs (dahy) do look spherical to me, though. In addition to implying that the earth is spherical like an ostrich's egg, when the Quran talks about the night following the day and the day following the night in 39:5, it uses the verb yukawiru. Yukawiru comes from the KWR root, which means to roll or become round/spherical. The Arabic word for sphere, kurah, is derived from the same root.

As for the notion that "Muslim apologists" only recently started interpreting the Quran as saying the earth is round, the 9th century Quran commentator al-Jubba'i interpreted it this way in his now lost commentary. The 11th century scholar, ibn Hazm, interpreted it this way in his book "al-fisal fi l-milal wa l-nihal". And The 12th centery Quran commentator, ar-Razi, also interpreted it this way.

In addition to the aforementioned Muslim scholars, other Muslim scholars also believed the earth was ROUND:

"Muslim scholars who held to the round Earth theory used it for a quintessentially Islamic purpose: to calculate the distance and direction from any given point on the Earth to Makkah (Mecca).[56] This determined the Qibla, or Muslim direction of prayer.

"A terrestrial globe (Kura-i-ard) was among the presents sent by the Persian Muslim astronomer Jamal-al-Din to Kubla Khan in 1267. It was made of wood on which "seven parts of water are represented in green, three parts of land in white, with rivers, lakes etc."[57] Ho Peng Yoke remarks that "it did not seem to have any general appeal to the Chinese in those days"."

Because Muslim scholars had to calculate the qibla on a ROUND earth, they practically invented spherical geometry:

"Muslims, according to Carra de Vaux, were "unquestionably the inventors of plane and spherical geometry, which did not, strictly speaking, exist among the Greeks".[2] The book of unknown arcs of a sphere written by Islamic mathematician Al-Jayyani is considered to be the first treatise on spherical trigonometry. The book contains formulae for right-handed triangles, the general law of sines, and the solution of a spherical triangle by means of the polar triangle.[3]

"The book On Triangles by Regiomontanus, written around 1463, is the first pure trigonometrical work in Europe. However, Gerolamo Cardano noted a century later that much of the material there on spherical trigonometry was taken from the twelfth-century work of the Spanish Islamic scholar Jabir ibn Aflah."

I should also point out that the Muslim scholar, al-Biruni, calculated the circumference of the ROUND earth in the 11th century. And the Muslim scholar, Ali Qushji, asserted that this ROUND earth was rotating in the 15th century. And here's a painting of Ottoman Muslim scholars studying a ROUND earth in the 16th century:

All of this was centuries before they claim modern "Muslim apologists" began saying that the Quran says the earth is round. This is by no means exhaustive treatment of this subject. It's just what I recall off the top of my head from my study of this subject."

GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: An advice to brother Osama
« on: August 30, 2013, 05:17:19 PM »
Thank you for clarifying your point, I agree with your explanation of the hadith about the bewitchment of the prophet, but the way i see it is that a muslim can either choose to accept or reject the hadith as it doesn't effect our faith or the laws of Islam.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9

What's new | A-Z | Discuss & Blog | Youtube