Why Islam does not clash with modern science, or does it?

[Abdelrahman]

Peace be unto all of you! Believers and Non-Believers alike!

As a Muslim, we put huge regard on scripture not clashing with modern science. We believe that if God created the scripture then it should not contain errors in it when referencing the natural world and what we've come to understand about it.

"Then do they not reflect upon the Qur'an? If it had been from [any] other than Allah, they would have found within it much contradiction." - The Holy Quran (4:82)

Many Christian/Atheist debates exist out there, but I am saddened to see that no atheists debate Muslim scholars who read and write Arabic fluently. When debates are organized between people who don't understand arabic or science it goes no where.

Arabic is my mother tongue. I also speak English at home so I'd say im fluent in both. I am a science university graduate and I love the topic of religion and science.

In Islam, we don't have 'blind faith'. I am not allowed to believe something blindly, I must have reasons. Real reasons. That is why we believe God allowed the prophets to perform miracles - so as to give people a sign. And since we believe the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) to be the last prophet, his sign and lasting miracle is the Qur'an. The Qur'an is meant to be a 'sign' to the end of time and I invite all members to reflect on its verses.

I am looking to debate someone on whether or not Islamic scriptural references to the natural world clash with modern scientific understanding!

[Clownboat]

Macroevolution has never been proven

Stop playing games please.
That populations evolve over time is a fact (this is evolution). The theory of evolution is how we best explain this fact.

Gravity is also a fact and we have gravitational theory to best explain it.
You can't prove macrogravity would be a silly response.

and neither has the origin of biological life.

That life originated is also indisputable. You just assert that your preferred god concept did it when the honest answer is that we don't yet know how life originated.

They remain a mystery to those who disregard GOD.

You evidence what I have been saying for years. Thank you.
Humans fear what they don't understand. Religions were invented to provide humans with answers to things they don't understand and fear, like how did we get here and what happens to us when we die.

No human knows what happens after death, yourself included. This is the honest truth. For countless humans that are uncomfortable with this, there are numerous god concept available to provide them with desired answers.

What I find funny is when such a human enters a debate forum pretending that their reasons to believe in their preferred god concept are different then those that believe in competing god concepts.
It just seems to come down to humans fearing in the end and other humans profiting of off this fear.

[LittleNipper]

Macroevolution has never been proven

Stop playing games please.
That populations evolve over time is a fact (this is evolution). The theory of evolution is how we best explain this fact.

Gravity is also a fact and we have gravitational theory to best explain it.
You can't prove macrogravity would be a silly response.

and neither has the origin of biological life.

That life originated is also indisputable. You just assert that your preferred god concept did it when the honest answer is that we don't yet know how life originated.

They remain a mystery to those who disregard GOD.

You evidence what I have been saying for years. Thank you.
Humans fear what they don't understand. Religions were invented to provide humans with answers to things they don't understand and fear, like how did we get here and what happens to us when we die.

No human knows what happens after death, yourself included. This is the honest truth. For countless humans that are uncomfortable with this, there are numerous god concept available to provide them with desired answers.

What I find funny is when such a human enters a debate forum pretending that their reasons to believe in their preferred god concept are different then those that believe in competing god concepts.
It just seems to come down to humans fearing in the end and other humans profiting of off this fear.

You have not proven that we have the capacity to become a master race nor any other species. But the fossil record does seem to indicate that the various species have degenerated and become weaker and inferior to their ancient ancestors of the same species. The saber tooth tiger is way larger than those found today. The same could be said of sharks, whales, plants, even humans appear not to have the muscular agility and bone strength of humans today. You've proven nothing but the ability to tell me what you have been told by many atheists.

[Tcg]

You have not proven that we have the capacity to become a master race nor any other species.

That's fine. Evolution doesn't teach that any should.

But the fossil record does seem to indicate that the various species have degenerated and become weaker and inferior to their ancient ancestors of the same species. The saber tooth tiger is way larger than those found today. The same could be said of sharks, whales, plants, even humans appear not to have the muscular agility and bone strength of humans today.

I commend you for at least not asking something silly like, "why don't we see cats giving birth to dogs?" But your understanding of natural selection is lacking. In some cases, little bitty species will have an evolutionary advantage.

You've proven nothing but the ability to tell me what you have been told by many atheists.

If you're fearful of learning facts from atheists, fret not, there are plenty of theists who accept the fact of evolution.


Tcg

[LittleNipper]

You have not proven that we have the capacity to become a master race nor any other species.

That's fine. Evolution doesn't teach that any should.

But the fossil record does seem to indicate that the various species have degenerated and become weaker and inferior to their ancient ancestors of the same species. The saber tooth tiger is way larger than those found today. The same could be said of sharks, whales, plants, even humans appear not to have the muscular agility and bone strength of humans today.

I commend you for at least not asking something silly like, "why don't we see cats giving birth to dogs?" But your understanding of natural selection is lacking. In some cases, little bitty species will have an evolutionary advantage.

You've proven nothing but the ability to tell me what you have been told by many atheists.

If you're fearful of learning facts from atheists, fret not, there are plenty of theists who accept the fact of evolution.


Tcg

Does evolution suggest that if one goes back far enough in time, humans would discover that our ancestry was once bacteria? If so, that would I imagine be proof positive that living things are becoming more and more COMPLEX. And are not the more complex forms of life master over mold and mildew?

There are also plenty of theists that don't read the Bible nor attend Church, but they certainly like Darwin.

[Clownboat]

Does evolution suggest that if one goes back far enough in time, humans would discover that our ancestry was once bacteria?

Evolution in its contemporary meaning in biology refers to the changes in the proportions of biological types in a population over time.

If so, that would I imagine be proof positive that living things are becoming more and more COMPLEX.

Then you need to correct your imagination. See the blind cave fish for one example of how losing complexity increased survival. Evolution is not a path to more complexity like you imagine it to be.

And are not the more complex forms of life master over mold and mildew?

Nope.
According to the CDC, more than 75,000 people are hospitalized in the U.S. every year with fungal infections.

There are also plenty of theists that don't read the Bible nor attend Church, but they certainly like Darwin.

That's because Darwin has been shown to be correct and that populations do evolve over time, which is what the Theory of Evolution claims. Yes, even most religious people have come to terms with this fact like you acknowledge.

[LittleNipper]

Does evolution suggest that if one goes back far enough in time, humans would discover that our ancestry was once bacteria?

Evolution in its contemporary meaning in biology refers to the changes in the proportions of biological types in a population over time.

If so, that would I imagine be proof positive that living things are becoming more and more COMPLEX.

Then you need to correct your imagination. See the blind cave fish for one example of how losing complexity increased survival. Evolution is not a path to more complexity like you imagine it to be.

And are not the more complex forms of life master over mold and mildew?

Nope.
According to the CDC, more than 75,000 people are hospitalized in the U.S. every year with fungal infections.

There are also plenty of theists that don't read the Bible nor attend Church, but they certainly like Darwin.

That's because Darwin has been shown to be correct and that populations do evolve over time, which is what the Theory of Evolution claims. Yes, even most religious people have come to terms with this fact like you acknowledge.

Darwin didn't regard single celled organisms as complex at all. And Darwin believed that organisms gained in complexity over time as they evolved. And Darwin believed that man created GOD, and now man wishes to be GOD ---- very much like Satan.

[Difflugia]

Darwin didn't regard single celled organisms as complex at all. And Darwin believed that organisms gained in complexity over time as they evolved.

What you're describing is Lamarckian evolution. If you had actually read any of Darwin's work, you would realize that his understanding of evolution is far more sophisticated than yours and Lamarck's. Here is a lengthy quotation from On the Origin of Species that says exactly the opposite of what you claim:

But it may be objected that if all organic beings thus tend to rise in the scale, how is it that throughout the world a multitude of the lowest forms still exist; and how is it that in each great class some forms are far more highly developed than others? Why have not the more highly developed forms everywhere supplanted and exterminated the lower? Lamarck, who believed in an innate and inevitable tendency toward perfection in all organic beings, seems to have felt this difficulty so strongly that he was led to suppose that new and simple forms are continually being produced by spontaneous generation. Science has not as yet proved the truth of this belief, whatever the future may reveal. On our theory the continued existence of lowly organisms offers no difficulty; for natural selection, or the survival of the fittest, does not necessarily include progressive development—it only takes advantage of such variations as arise and are beneficial to each creature under its complex relations of life. And it may be asked what advantage, as far as we can see, would it be to an infusorian animalcule—to an intestinal worm—or even to an earth-worm, to be highly organized. If it were no advantage, these forms would be left, by natural selection, unimproved or but little improved, and might remain for indefinite ages in their present lowly condition. And geology tells us that some of the lowest forms, as the infusoria and rhizopods, have remained for an enormous period in nearly their present state. But to suppose that most of the many now existing low forms have not in the least advanced since the first dawn of life would be extremely rash; for every naturalist who has dissected some of the beings now ranked as very low in the scale, must have been struck with their really wondrous and beautiful organization.

Lamarck believed in progressive evolution. Darwin explicitly did not.

And Darwin believed that man created GOD, and now man wishes to be GOD

I like bacon sandwiches and cotton-polyester blends too much to want to be GOD.

---- very much like Satan.

Hail Bacon!

[LittleNipper]

Macroevolution has never been proven

Stop playing games please.
That populations evolve over time is a fact (this is evolution). The theory of evolution is how we best explain this fact.

Gravity is also a fact and we have gravitational theory to best explain it.
You can't prove macrogravity would be a silly response.

and neither has the origin of biological life.

That life originated is also indisputable. You just assert that your preferred god concept did it when the honest answer is that we don't yet know how life originated.

They remain a mystery to those who disregard GOD.

You evidence what I have been saying for years. Thank you.
Humans fear what they don't understand. Religions were invented to provide humans with answers to things they don't understand and fear, like how did we get here and what happens to us when we die.

No human knows what happens after death, yourself included. This is the honest truth. For countless humans that are uncomfortable with this, there are numerous god concept available to provide them with desired answers.

What I find funny is when such a human enters a debate forum pretending that their reasons to believe in their preferred god concept are different then those that believe in competing god concepts.
It just seems to come down to humans fearing in the end and other humans profiting of off this fear.

That biological life was created by GOD and HIM alone is indisputable. No one else has ever created biological life from inert substances, let alone from nothing... Religions were invented by man in an attempt to fill the gap between Man and GOD. Christianity was established by GOD to fill the gap between GOD and man. Religions attempt to try to reach out to GOD or become god, whereas, Christianity is GOD reaching down to man and saving man without expecting anything from man other than faith in CHRIST.

[Tcg]

That biological life was created by GOD and HIM alone is indisputable.

Then you should be able to provide indisputable evidence to support this assertion. What have you got?


Tcg

[LittleNipper]

That biological life was created by GOD and HIM alone is indisputable.

Then you should be able to provide indisputable evidence to support this assertion. What have you got?


Tcg

I've got the BIBLE, HISTORY, ARCHEOLOGY, JESUS, OTHER BELIEVERS, answered PRAYERS, ISRAEL, the JEWS, CREATIONIST SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH, the difference in ATTITUDES between Christians and nonbelievers...