h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Salaam,

Sorry to put a slur on things but

When you say God created man in his own image then your all presuming that its only christian or jews etc that say God created man.

I just want to point out that in Islam we don't believe we are made in the image of God, as God does not have a form we can begin to understand.

Plus as for the world thing, Muslims believe that in God created every thing and that in every thing there is proof of his (I say his rather than it) existance.

Muslims are told to learn about every thing they can and so things like the conquering the depths and going in to space are acceptable to Muslims as we believe God has given us permission to do those things.

So as for the wasted material we can't see that is there for us to explore if we wish to, though we can not do so at the moment with our level of scince.

Also Muslims believe in the same God as the christians and the Jews.

We believe there is only one God and he sent his message down to all people over thousands of years, and that originally all religions preached the oneness of God and thats why Muslims see Moses and Jesus etc as prophets from God.

Ok now that the mad ramblings of me has finished on those issues, why don't we get back to the actual article and what it is saying.

Adib

hi Musaakboy,

<>

That's interesting and it does make more sense than to think that any god would need arms, legs, etc.

But in the same sense that you agree you cannot understand your God's for, do you feel you can truly understand its essense?

I have always thought that what people call god(s) is something that is beyond our comprehension as temporal physical beings. So I can see that there is a 'oneness' to all the god concepts. But I cannot see that any one religion has the only One True God.

az

sorry, that should read: you cannot understand your God's form

oops,
az

Hi Muzaakboy, long time no see.

Yes, as az says, the Muslim view is much more sensible. Nonetheless the account of creation in Genesis does state that God made Man in His image. This thread began in support of the biblical account of creation so that was one of my counter arguments.

The more vague the description of something then the harder it is to detect or disprove. As knowledge of the nature of things grows the more people retreat into increasingly vague descriptions of their gods. Christians unfortunately are stuck with the descriptions in their bible so have to refer to these as 'allegorical' in order to avoid the 'Word of God' looking like the ramblings of an idiot.

Much of the wasted material is not just invisible to us; the light from it has taken so long to get here much of it may no longer exist. Far from exploring this space we have no hope of ever even interacting with it.

F

In Islam we can not visual lise what God looks like, but we do know his attributes.

You may have heard of the 99 names of Allah.
Muslims believe that God has 100 names but man only knows of 99 of them.

It has to be said though that while we call them names they are actually what Muslims believe are his attributes.

They are:

The Enforcer
The Mighty
The Guardian
The Guardian of faith
The Source of peace
The Holy
The King
The Merciful
The Beneficent
The Opener
The Provider
The Bestower
The Fubduer
The Forgiver
The Fashioner
The Evolver
The Creator
The Supreme
The All-seeing
The All-knowing
The Humiliator
The Dignifier
The Exalter
The Abaser
The Expander
The Seizer
The All-knowing
The Most high
The Appreciative
The Forgiver (I know its printed twice bt its actually a different name in Arabic, but when you translate them they both mean forgiver but in Arabic they are different in meaning)
The Magnificent
The Forbearing
The Aware
The Subtle
The Just
The Judge
The All-embrassing
The Responder to prayer
The Vigilant
The Munificent
The Glorious
The Reckoner
The Nourisher
The Preserver
The Most Great
The Truth
The Witness
The Resurrecter
The Majestic
The Loving
The Wise
The Appraiser
The Praiseworthy
The Protector
The Firm
The Strong
The Ultimate trustee
The Self existing
The Eternal
The Causer of Death
The Giver of life
The Restorer
The Originator
The Delayer
The Expediter
The Powerful
The Able
The Absolute
The Unique
The One
The Splendid
The Finder
The Avenger
The Accepter of repentance
The source of all Goodness
The Most exalted
The Suprme governor
The Hidden
The Manifest
The last
The First
The Preventer
The Enricher
The Self sufficent
The Gatherer
The Lord of majesty and generosity
The Equitable
The Master of sovereignity
The Clement
The Pardoner
The Patient
The Righteous
The Inheritor
The Everlasting
The Originator
The Guide
The Light
The Propitious
The One who causes loss.

Don't worry if you skipped to this bit, I do not expect you to read it all.
The propblem is a lot of them have lost there full meaning after translaton in to English, but any way Muslims believe that we can Allah through these Attributes/Names.

Also Muslims do not believe that they only have the one true God, we believe there is only one God and that christians and Jews etc all believe in that same one God.

Those who worship more than one God we believe that the prophet/ messanger who baught that faith to them origanly taught about the oneness of God but people later changed it to worshiping multiple Gods.

On the subject of this actual article though, Muslims are against the Darwinian proposition that the universe came in to existence not by an act of creation but through evolution, and for example that human beings evolved from apes.
Muslims believe that the universe, with all its elements in it, is a creation of God. Islam does endorse the idea that living things came from non-living things but only as part of the creation process. Even then each species was created directly and independently of the others (Quran 24:45)

For Muslims, Evolution can only be the name of a process, it is in no way an ultimate cause. It does not explain the very origin of the universe and life, but only the way it progressed after they came in to existence. Muslims believe that species may adapt to different conditions and give rise to a number of new varieties, but they remain distinct and do not evolve, over time, in to a new species

I bet that will start a debate.

Adib

Salaam fatham,

<>

There is a lesson to be learnt in that, every thing comes to an end sooner or later, and that some things will always be beyond your reach.

Seriously though, If they had not existed then the gravitaniol forces that helped create the planits after the big bang would be weaker and so most likely the universe would be viod of planits if the 'useless mass' never existed in the first place.
I read some where that if the speed of the expanstion of the universe was a tiny bit faster or smaller then the universe would not have happened, or some thing like that.

Plus does not these things we can never reach or interact with, give us bueatifull things to look at, I mean you can' loof at a stellar nursery on the other side of the galaxy and say it is not astonishing to look at, plus we hve learnt so much from these things we can never reach or what ever.


Adib

"Don't worry if you skipped to this bit, I do not expect you to read it all."

I did just that - then had to laugh.


"I bet that will start a debate."

It will. There is clear and unequivocal evidence that evolution leads to speciation: new species can indeed evolve.

Evolution is not the origin of life. That was a bit of organic chemistry and it took a long time for those organic molecules to form anything which was able to replicate and evolve. Once that happened - and it may have happened several times - evolution was the driving force which led to the huge diversity of life we see today.

Before we get deeper into this I've a question for you which interests me. There is currently a lot of activity going on with the search for life on Mars. We don't expect to find aliens of course - we don't 'expect' to find anything. If they do find evidence of life on Mars however, how will that sit with the teachings of Islam? Is life on other planets a possibility under Allah?

F

Ha ha I just finished writing a entry on FAQ's about Islam its called or some thing similer. It actually covers that question in it.

But for your benefit:

What does Islam say about life on other planets?
The Quran does allude to life in outer space, thus:

And among His signs is the creation of the heavens and the living creatures He has scattered through them. (42.29)

And

The seven heavens and the earth, and beings therein, declare his glory. (17:44)

These verses indicate that there is life in some form or another on some planets in the galaxies. Until scientific means become more sophisticated to make this discovery, this Quranic statement will remain an unfulfilled prophecy.

Again though the ayaats (verses) loose some meaning in translation from Arabic, sorry.

Note o the forgiver thing I said in the above:

The First one is Al - Ghaffar which is the forgiver (but like a high forgivness) and the second is Al- Ghafur which again is in english the forgiver but it is more like a formal pardon from the higest King.

Thanks, that's interesting.



F

No worries.

Adib

Where does the 5% nation of Islam and their storie about the creation fit into Islam if at all?

one love

Welcome back Adib

"Muslims are against the Darwinian proposition that the universe came in to existence not by an act of creation but through evolution, and for example that human beings evolved from apes."

Darwin never proposed this. And we did not come from apes, we share a recent common ancestor with them, the difference is huge and crucial. So Muslims and evolutionary biologists agree on both points.


"Muslims believe that the universe, with all its elements in it, is a creation of God. Islam does endorse the idea that living things came from non-living things but only as part of the creation process. Even then each species was created directly and independently of the others (Quran 24:45)"

The theory of evolution says nothing that refutes nor contradicts this. Again, evolution is in agreement with Islam.


"For Muslims, Evolution can only be the name of a process, it is in no way an ultimate cause."

*Exactly*! Completely agree! This is a common misconception amongst the public, and it's not something that biologists think. This makes me very happy to know that there are a large group of people (Muslims) who think along the same lines as biologists.


"It does not explain the very origin of the universe and life, but only the way it progressed after they came in to existence."

Evolutionary biologists would agree.


"Muslims believe that species may adapt to different conditions and give rise to a number of new varieties, but they remain distinct and do not evolve, over time, in to a new species.:

Agree with the first bit, not the second. There is a LOT of hard evidence that contradicts the second part.

You believe that species can adapt to give rise to new "varieties". This is my question to you, Adib: Can you possibly imagine one of these new varieties not being able to breed with another variety, just by chance?

I look forward to your reply my friend, we seem to have more in common than we think

Ste

"On the subject of this actual article though, Muslims are against the Darwinian proposition that the universe came in to existence not by an act of creation but through evolution, and for example that human beings evolved from apes.
Muslims believe that the universe, with all its elements in it, is a creation of God. Islam does endorse the idea that living things came from non-living things but only as part of the creation process. Even then each species was created directly and independently of the others (Quran 24:45)"

I realize this is off topic, but I am pedantical. Darwin never said that life came from non-life, or anything about the origen of the universe. Actually, at the end of Origin os Species, he basicly says that life was made by some deity.

Ok we believe that lets say a cockerspaniel could breed with a german sheperd (ok very unlikely I know but its the only two dogs I could think of at the time) could breed together but there ofspring would still be a dog and not a new species.

We believe that for instance no matter how many thousands of years pass any species like cats or dogs will stay as Cats or Dogs but that the fittist will survive and so creatures could adapt to a certain degree to the enviroment its living in but it would still be what ever species it was when it started and it would have no new organs like three legs or two hearts, or what ever.
The tail lenth may change or the legs might be longer but it is still a dog and still has all the charteristics of what dog's had to start of with and so is not a new species for example.

No you're right Muzak, two dogs of practically any breed can successfully mate. A chihuahua might have difficulty giving birth to the offspring of british bulldog or similar bulbous headed breed but its far from impossible.

Yet fish have gills, some land animals have lungs and insects breath through their skin. Darwin and others who followed and refined his work have showed by studying the fossil record and by repeatable experiments that down the generations species do evolve. They do grow extra or loose limbs, loose their sight and evolve sonar. These things do happen happen to say they do not is just ignoring readily proven facts. New species that are distinct from their forebears and other descendants of their forebares do evolve. An ostritch and a penguin are both birds.

The islamic view of creation falls down because it is answer to the human question, "why are things like this"? therefore the answer is flawed. The proper question is< "How did things get like this"?

one love

Evolution of one species turning in to another over time is not accepable for Muslims.

We believe God made all species seperate and independantly.

I have never come accross some conclusive prove that the evolution of species in to another is correct.

I don't see also how a small dinosar chasing flys is suddenly going to grow wings from this, as there is major difference between a bird and a dinosur.

Adib

You're absolutely right evolution is not sudden.

Animals dont sprout wings, plants dontchange from ever greens to deciduous overnight.

The proff of evolution of different species is shown by experiments where radio activity was used to speed up the rate of mutation in fruit flies. They have a very short life span so many generations could be observed during the experiment. They eventually bred a group of flies that had distinct charetaristics from the original group and could not mate sucessfully with unaltered fruit flies.

I have never come accross that. From what I know that any new fruit flies they mutated ended up being sterile, or having things like legs growing out of the eyes.

Plus thats not a new specis its still a fruit fly, just a different type.

Gold fish and cod can't breed but there still both fish.

Adib

I may be wrong I watched that OU prog. when I was very young and cant remember it *exactly*.

Gold fish and cod cant breed but they're still both fish. That was my point was'nt it

"Plus thats not a new specis its still a fruit fly, just a different type."

Earlier you said one couldn't produce new limbs or organs that way-- example extra legs. But now you admit that fruit flys can be bred with extra legs coming out of their eyes. How do you define fruit fly--what is the range that would have to be exceeded for it to be a new species?



"Gold fish and cod can't breed but there still both fish."

Because fish aren't one species--they are t atxonomic group on the same order as mammels or reptiles. You wouldn't expect an elephant and a mouse to be able to breed any more than a goldfish and a cod can.

Dogs, on the other hand, are one species.