Page 1 of 1

Reconciling Adam and eve with evolution.Your thoughts?

PostPosted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:25 am
by MohamedLuq93
Category theory is a mathematical discipline, which facilitates the study of separate areas of formal endeavor from a highly abstract perspective.

This way commonalities occurring in often disparate fields of mathematics can be identified.

This in turn entails the fabulously marvellous advantage, that insights gleaned with blood, sweat and tears in one particular area can be carried over frolicsomely to another discipline, which is structurally sufficiently similar to the former.

To me — pray, take heed, I present exclusively, only and solely my individual and personal approach and understanding —, mathematics in toto signifies a type of category theory, which links Islamic theology with the sciences.

Applied to the question at hand, this leads to the subsequent realization.

For one, whatever is accessible to science, can be ultimately formulated mathematically with the employment of complex, intricate and often even intractable systems of differential equations as the constituents of formal models.

This maxim is applicable to the theory of evolution, too.

To my liking, though, three features are still lacking in order to render Darwin’s darling persuasive to me and the conceptual predicament is best captured by way of the subsequent three questions

What is consciousness and what areas in the brain represent it functionally?
How do genetical mutations give rise to consciousness at the human level?
What does the transition from inanimate to animate matter look like?
As long as there are no satisfactory resolutions to the inquiries at hand, I couldn’t be bothered to deviate from a literal comprehension of the theological episode involving Adam (AS) and Eve.

The holy Qur’an mentions, that Adam (AS) and Eve are the starting points of humanity.

Unless the evolutionary chain is covered without gaps from inanimate matter all the way through to human consciousness, there is no need for me to deviate from a literal reading.

Once the theory of evolution meets my scientific standards, mathematics as the category theory linking Islamic theology and the sciences kicks in.

This is precisely the moment, then, when I’d let go of a literal interpretation in favor of a highly mathematized one.

My argument would unfurl along the subsequently sketched line of reasoning.

Adam (AS) is alluded to as the first human being, first Muslim and first prophet in Islam.

This accumulation of firsts is indicative of an exegetical hint, that he is to be viewed as an instrumental template.

String theory makes mention of the Anthropic Principle, which asserts, that our universe harbors life, because the configuration of its natural constants and laws allows for the emergence of biological organisms.

All processes are created by Allah (SWT) and unfold according to the mathematical laws instituted by Him.

Thus, evolution, too, proceeds mathematically in accordance with specific formal rules.

Adam (AS) as a template for humanity thus signifies the sub-set of mathematical laws in the greater evolutionary scheme, which gave rise to the emergence of human beings.

Thus, depending on the sophistication of the theory of evolution, I either don’t break my pate at all and believe in Adam (AS) as a concrete and individual person or I take up a more abstract understanding, which renders Adam (AS) into the evolutionarily relevant mathematics.

All the while, the primary Islamic scriptures remain untouched, i.e. with zero alterations.

Only the focus of my interpretation shifts, which is legitimate in Islamic theology.

Theologically Muslims are supposed to advance, develop, evolve, hone and refine their interpretative comprehension continually.

To me, as a Muslimah, there is zero animosity and friction between Islam and the sciences.

I have been brought up on the foundation of the conviction, that Islam is the religion of knowledge.

Whatever scientific insights are gleaned and sufficiently persuasively and robustly bolstered, I’m more than confident, that via the bridge provided by mathematics I can reconcile at all times my Islamic faith with the scientific variant of rationality.

https://www.quora.com/How-do-Muslims-re ... srid=3CUYw

Re: Reconciling Adam and eve with evolution.Your thoughts?

PostPosted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 8:18 am
by manfred
"Adam" is not a name, but simply means "man" in Hebrew. The whole passage in the bible, which is the source for the Islamic Adam, is a POEM.

It does not make any claim to be a historical account, it has an entirely different purpose: to make some teaching points. God is the creator, the final cause of the the universe and all that is in it. Man has a special role in this universe, given by God, he was appointed the "administrator" of creation, he names the creatures, and he is to take care of things. Man fails in his duty and is disobedient to God. The consequence of this disobedience is that man looses his place in the "garden", the creation as originally intended, and he becomes mortal. He also finds that as a consequence of his disobedience he must learn to make his own living through work.

That, in a nutshell, is the contents of the POEM found at the start of Genesis. When people read a poem, say the "Erl King" by Goethe, they are also confronted with a story. This example, it is a story of the approach of death to a small boy in the form of a ghostly Fairy king. Nobody would presume that the poem describes a historical event. But if you read it carefully you will find "truth" in that poem too, but of a different kind, not historical truth, instead something about the futility of denying death.

The same is true about the creation story. There is a lot in that text, and almost all of it will be missed if you ignore the fact that it is a poem and pretend it is a historical account. The story is about man's place in the world and the origin of evil, not about some guy called Adam who was taller than an elephant....

Re: Reconciling Adam and eve with evolution.Your thoughts?

PostPosted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 2:51 pm
by frankie
Mohamedluq93
To me, as a Muslimah, there is zero animosity and friction between Islam and the sciences.



Really?

Could you explain why a biological error occurs in a book said to be the eternal words of the Islamic god Allah, which should not occur if Allah were truly the omniscient being we are led to believe?

Quran 86.6-7
6. He is created from a drop emitted-

7. Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs:

http://quranx.com/Tafsirs/86.6

The Quran claims that the “sexual fluid “of a man, proceeds from the between his backbone, and the “sexual fluid” of a woman proceeds from her ribs/chest, both of which are wrong.


The “sexual fluid “of a man is produced in the testes, found in the genital area, not the backbone of a man.
The “sexual fluid “of a woman, is formed within the vagina, during sexual intercourse, and plays no part in reproduction, it is there only for lubrication.

What does play a part in reproduction in a woman is the ovum, which is formed in the ovaries, found on each side of the lower abdomen, nowhere near the chest/ribs.


Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi - Tafhim al-Qur'an

"Sulb" is the backbone and "tara'ib"the breast- bones, i.e. the ribs. Since the procreative fluid in both man and woman is discharged from that part of the body which is between the back and the breast, it is said that man has been created from the fluid issuing out froth between the back and the breast.”



Ibn Kathir Tafsir:

"Allah says,
فَلْيَنظُرِ الإِنسَـنُ مِمَّ خُلِقَ
(So, let man see from what he is created!) This is alerting man to the weakness of his origin from which he was created. The intent of it is to guide man to accept (the reality of) the Hereafter, because whoever is able to begin the creation then he is also able to repeat it in the same way. This is as Allah says,
وَهُوَ الَّذِى يَبْدَأُ الْخَلْقَ ثُمَّ يُعِيدُهُ وَهُوَ أَهْوَنُ عَلَيْهِ
(And He it is Who originates the creation, then He will repeat it; and this is easier for Him.) (30:27) Then Allah says,
خُلِقَ مِن مَّآءٍ دَافِقٍ
(He is created from a water gushing forth.) meaning, the sexual fluid that comes out bursting forth from the man and the woman. Thus, the child is produced from both of them by the permission of Allah. Due to this Allah says,
يَخْرُجُ مِن بَيْنِ الصُّلْبِ وَالتَّرَآئِبِ
(Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.) meaning, the backbone (or loins) of the man and the ribs of the woman, which is referring to her chest. Shabib bin Bishr reported from `Ikrimah who narrated from Ibn `Abbas that he said,
يَخْرُجُ مِن بَيْنِ الصُّلْبِ وَالتَّرَآئِبِ
(Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.) "The backbone of the man and the ribs of the woman. It (the fluid) is yellow and fine in texture. The child will not be born except from both of them (i.e., their sexual fluids).'

Re: Reconciling Adam and eve with evolution.Your thoughts?

PostPosted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 9:06 pm
by idesigner1
Chapter of Genesis of OT was written after Babylonian exile. It copied many elements from Babylonian account.

Just one pair of homosapien can't populate whole world with numerous tribes and four major races.

According to theory of evolution pairs of breeding population result in natural selection. There must be 100 s or more pairs selected from ape like mammals which evolved into modern looking homosapiens. Many lines became extinct many interbreeded and we had modern looking homosapiens. They went out of Africa some hundred thousand years ago to became Neanderthal cromagnin etc. and other lines . Three main races of human kind like nigroid Caucasoids and mongoloids came later.

Some one should try with just one pair of dog or cat and interbreed for 100 generations and see what happens. Chances are it will go extinct.

Re: Reconciling Adam and eve with evolution.Your thoughts?

PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 4:39 am
by iffo
MohamedLuq93 wrote:Category theory is a mathematical discipline, which facilitates the study of separate areas of formal endeavor from a highly abstract perspective.

This way commonalities occurring in often disparate fields of mathematics can be identified.

This in turn entails the fabulously marvellous advantage, that insights gleaned with blood, sweat and tears in one particular area can be carried over frolicsomely to another discipline, which is structurally sufficiently similar to the former.

To me — pray, take heed, I present exclusively, only and solely my individual and personal approach and understanding —, mathematics in toto signifies a type of category theory, which links Islamic theology with the sciences.

Applied to the question at hand, this leads to the subsequent realization.

For one, whatever is accessible to science, can be ultimately formulated mathematically with the employment of complex, intricate and often even intractable systems of differential equations as the constituents of formal models.

This maxim is applicable to the theory of evolution, too.

To my liking, though, three features are still lacking in order to render Darwin’s darling persuasive to me and the conceptual predicament is best captured by way of the subsequent three questions

What is consciousness and what areas in the brain represent it functionally?
How do genetical mutations give rise to consciousness at the human level?
What does the transition from inanimate to animate matter look like?
As long as there are no satisfactory resolutions to the inquiries at hand, I couldn’t be bothered to deviate from a literal comprehension of the theological episode involving Adam (AS) and Eve.

The holy Qur’an mentions, that Adam (AS) and Eve are the starting points of humanity.

Unless the evolutionary chain is covered without gaps from inanimate matter all the way through to human consciousness, there is no need for me to deviate from a literal reading.

Once the theory of evolution meets my scientific standards, mathematics as the category theory linking Islamic theology and the sciences kicks in.

This is precisely the moment, then, when I’d let go of a literal interpretation in favor of a highly mathematized one.

My argument would unfurl along the subsequently sketched line of reasoning.

Adam (AS) is alluded to as the first human being, first Muslim and first prophet in Islam.

This accumulation of firsts is indicative of an exegetical hint, that he is to be viewed as an instrumental template.

String theory makes mention of the Anthropic Principle, which asserts, that our universe harbors life, because the configuration of its natural constants and laws allows for the emergence of biological organisms.

All processes are created by Allah (SWT) and unfold according to the mathematical laws instituted by Him.

Thus, evolution, too, proceeds mathematically in accordance with specific formal rules.

Adam (AS) as a template for humanity thus signifies the sub-set of mathematical laws in the greater evolutionary scheme, which gave rise to the emergence of human beings.

Thus, depending on the sophistication of the theory of evolution, I either don’t break my pate at all and believe in Adam (AS) as a concrete and individual person or I take up a more abstract understanding, which renders Adam (AS) into the evolutionarily relevant mathematics.

All the while, the primary Islamic scriptures remain untouched, i.e. with zero alterations.

Only the focus of my interpretation shifts, which is legitimate in Islamic theology.

Theologically Muslims are supposed to advance, develop, evolve, hone and refine their interpretative comprehension continually.

To me, as a Muslimah, there is zero animosity and friction between Islam and the sciences.

I have been brought up on the foundation of the conviction, that Islam is the religion of knowledge.

Whatever scientific insights are gleaned and sufficiently persuasively and robustly bolstered, I’m more than confident, that via the bridge provided by mathematics I can reconcile at all times my Islamic faith with the scientific variant of rationality.

https://www.quora.com/How-do-Muslims-re ... srid=3CUYw


You are just wasting your time. Bottom line is a book as stupid as quran can not be from any god. That's why it proves your prophet was a cheat. I am sure you can write a better book than that. Your goal is to defend the religion of your birth. Once your goal becomes to know the truth things will become very clear and easy for you.

As an educated woman you should be ashamed of your prophet who had sex with 9 years old girl. And legalized the pràctice of sex slaves with divine command.

Re: Reconciling Adam and eve with evolution.Your thoughts?

PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 11:17 am
by Fernando
What does the transition from inanimate to animate matter look like?
As long as there are no satisfactory resolutions to the inquiries at hand, I couldn’t be bothered to deviate from a literal comprehension of the theological episode involving Adam (AS) and Eve.
Perhaps the most interesting and challenging question, but nothing to do with evolution - it's abiogenesis. I would agree with Manfred that Genesis is not a literal account but one could argue that Adam is a metaphor for that original abiogenesis. After all, being created from mud isn't a bad description of abiogenesis, for those days.

Re: Reconciling Adam and eve with evolution.Your thoughts?

PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 4:19 pm
by idesigner1
Fernando wrote:
What does the transition from inanimate to animate matter look like?
As long as there are no satisfactory resolutions to the inquiries at hand, I couldn’t be bothered to deviate from a literal comprehension of the theological episode involving Adam (AS) and Eve.
Perhaps the most interesting and challenging question, but nothing to do with evolution - it's abiogenesis. I would agree with Manfred that Genesis is not a literal account but one could argue that Adam is a metaphor for that original abiogenesis. After all, being created from mud isn't a bad description of abiogenesis, for those days.



If you go by theory of a biogenesis transition from non living to living would have lhappned step by step from cyanogen compound to amino acids to carbohydrates and proteins.

These chemicals can become DNA and other life building chemicals finally ending up as primitive bacteria. Viruses came later as they are parasites of cells.

There are numerous experiment depicting the transitions plus we have evidence from ancient rocks.

In my opinion Adam and Eve story can't be a metaphor. According to that story god created humans from mud where as abiogenesis is explained by physico chemical processes.Life sustaining oxygen came quite late after half billion years!

Re: Reconciling Adam and eve with evolution.Your thoughts?

PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2018 10:38 am
by Garudaman
evolution = animal -> human
quran = clay -> human
animal = clay

Re: Reconciling Adam and eve with evolution.Your thoughts?

PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2018 6:51 pm
by manfred
Say that to the bloody cat I am baby-sitting while the owners are on holiday... So far I had a ripped curtain, and a "puddle" on the carpet in my bedroom. During the day it is quiet and gets grouchy if I bother it, but in the night it has a habit of clonking around and sometime jumping on my bed...

I prefer a clay cat.... I don't need to feed it, clear of after it and it does not annoy me in the night.

Evolution is a scientific theory. The creation account (which the Qur'an corrupted) is not about science, is is an allegorical poem about the human condition, from a religious perspective.

Re: Reconciling Adam and eve with evolution.Your thoughts?

PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2018 10:47 pm
by Garudaman
when people dead, they're literally turn back into dust, like the Bible said.

Re: Reconciling Adam and eve with evolution.Your thoughts?

PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2018 11:00 pm
by Fernando
Garudaman wrote:when people dead, they're literally turn back into dust, like the Bible said.
Maybe not literally, actually. Apart from that, the Bible is merely reporting a common observation.