Announcement

Collapse

Islam Guidelines

Theists only.

This forum is a debate area to discuss issues pertaining to Islam. This forum is generally for theists only, and is not the area for debate between atheists and theists. Non-theist may not post here without first obtaining permission from the moderator of this forum. Granting of such permission is subject to Moderator discretion - and may be revoked if the Moderator feels that the poster is not keeping with the spirit of the World Religions Department.



Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Islam and evolution

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Joseph View Post
    I think Comparative Religion would be fine. I will go there and start. I hope shunyadragon and others here will come. Since shunyadragon doesn't think there is any problem between what's been written by Baha'is and evolution, perhaps he could begin by explaining his view of evolution.
    Actually you do not need a new thread. I am a geologist with a good academic background in Biology. I endorse Methodological Naturalism. The purpose and function of all the sciences, particularly the basic sciences, is to research and gather knowledge of the nature of our physical existence independent of any religious presuppositions. The Baha'i principle of the 'Independent Investigation of Truth' reinforces this view.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
      I do not believe that Comparative Religion. As far as I know atheists are not allowed, but I will check. Natural Science is the only choice even for soft core atheists.
      You are correct, Comp Religion is Theist only, but non-theists can request permission to participate from the thread starter if they agree to not make it a theist vs non-theist discussion, and my comment about "hardcore atheists" was essentially an observation of the anti-theist tendencies Nat Sci often seems to have.
      Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you do so by works of the law, or by hearing with faith? -Galatians 3:5

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Pentecost View Post
        You are correct, Comp Religion is Theist only, but non-theists can request permission to participate from the thread starter if they agree to not make it a theist vs non-theist discussion, and my comment about "hardcore atheists" was essentially an observation of the anti-theist tendencies Nat Sci often seems to have.
        Anti-YEC is NOT anti-Theist.

        K54

        Comment


        • Questions on polls sometimes frame questions with a Western-centric bias that does not translate well into other non-Western cultures....
          http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnfarr...lam-an-update/

          Elsdon-Baker argues that recent surveys (not including the one I discussed last month by Amy Unsworth) not only fail to reflect the real views of Muslims on the topic of evolution, but that given the way the questions are framed in the polls she discusses, they’re likely responsible for helping inspire more creationists.

          For example, she writes, in one BBC poll, there was too much binary framing, and by its definition acceptance of evolutionary science amounted to acceptance of atheism or agnosticism. There was no response available for people who accept the scientific consensus and happen to be religious. Not surprisingly, then, a significant percentage of Muslims surveyed in the BBC poll chose … to reject evolution.

          Polls need to be far more nuanced in how they frame the questions, Elsdon-Baker writes.

          Controversially, we need to recognize that not all ‘creationism’ is actually ‘creationism’ in what we might consider the mainstream understanding of the word as oppositional to acceptance of evolutionary theory. Surprisingly, in my experience, not all of those who would classify themselves as ‘creationists’ are actually anti-evolutionists. One way around this is to unpick the epistemic categories that we have structured under the classification that is ‘creationism’. Far from arguing that spiritual explanations should be included in scientific discourse or communication, I am arguing that we need to recognize the nuanced, varied and, in some cases, sophisticated accommodationist models employed across differing cultural contexts in a way that does not exclude people of any faith from being evolutionists.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by siam View Post
            Questions on polls sometimes frame questions with a Western-centric bias that does not translate well into other non-Western cultures....
            http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnfarr...lam-an-update/

            Elsdon-Baker argues that recent surveys (not including the one I discussed last month by Amy Unsworth) not only fail to reflect the real views of Muslims on the topic of evolution, but that given the way the questions are framed in the polls she discusses, they’re likely responsible for helping inspire more creationists.

            For example, she writes, in one BBC poll, there was too much binary framing, and by its definition acceptance of evolutionary science amounted to acceptance of atheism or agnosticism. There was no response available for people who accept the scientific consensus and happen to be religious. Not surprisingly, then, a significant percentage of Muslims surveyed in the BBC poll chose … to reject evolution.

            Polls need to be far more nuanced in how they frame the questions, Elsdon-Baker writes.

            Controversially, we need to recognize that not all ‘creationism’ is actually ‘creationism’ in what we might consider the mainstream understanding of the word as oppositional to acceptance of evolutionary theory. Surprisingly, in my experience, not all of those who would classify themselves as ‘creationists’ are actually anti-evolutionists. One way around this is to unpick the epistemic categories that we have structured under the classification that is ‘creationism’. Far from arguing that spiritual explanations should be included in scientific discourse or communication, I am arguing that we need to recognize the nuanced, varied and, in some cases, sophisticated accommodationist models employed across differing cultural contexts in a way that does not exclude people of any faith from being evolutionists.
            I do not consider the negative view of many Muslims that nuanced. The prevalent view is that yes life evolved, but human evolution or Creation are not physically part of the natural evolution of life. Some early Baha'i quotes may be interpreted to show this view also, but the basic principles of the Baha'i Faith state that the evolving knowledge of science must be accepted and ALL scripture including Baha'i scripture must be understood in the light of science. The scripture of the other religions of the world including the Bible and the Koran lack this modern guidance.

            This unique foundation principle is described in the following by Abdul'baha

            Two Role of Religion in Science

            "Now, all questions of morality contained in the spiritual, immutable law of every religion are logically right. If religion were contrary to logical reason then it would cease to be a religion and be merely a tradition. Religion and science are the two wings upon which man's intelligence can soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress. It is not possible to fly with one wing alone! Should a man try to fly with the wing of religion alone he would quickly fall into the quagmire of superstition, whilst on the other hand, with the wing of science alone he would also make no progress, but fall into the despairing slough of materialism."

            Paris Talks, Pages 141-146: gr16

            It is the moral teaching that are immutable and absolute.

            Harmony of Science and Religion

            Another cause of dissension and disagreement is the fact that religion has been pronounced at variance with science. Between scientists and the followers of religion there has always been controversy and strife for the reason that the latter have proclaimed religion superior in authority to science and considered scientific announcement opposed to the teachings of religion. Baha'u'llah declared that religion is in complete harmony with science and reason. If religious belief and doctrine is at variance with reason, it proceeds from the limited mind of man and not from God; therefore, it is unworthy of belief and not deserving of attention; the heart finds no rest in it, and real faith is impossible. How can man believe that which he knows to be opposed to reason? Is this possible? Can the heart accept that which reason denies? Reason is the first faculty of man, and the religion of God is in harmony with it. Baha'u'llah has removed this form of dissension and discord from among mankind and reconciled science . . .

            The Promulgation of Universal Peace, Pages 228-235: gr9

            Among other principles of Baha'u'llah's teachings was the harmony of science and religion. Religion must stand the analysis of reason. It must agree with scientific fact and proof so that science will sanction religion and religion fortify science. Both are indissolubly welded and joined in reality. If statements and teachings of religion are found to be unreasonable and contrary to science, they are outcomes of superstition and imagination. . .

            The Promulgation of Universal Peace, Pages 172-176: gr9
            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

            go with the flow the river knows . . .

            Frank

            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

            Comment


            • I agree with what you have written.

              However, is it right to have blind faith in reason and science?
              My opinion is that blind faith is never right in any pursuit of knowledge....

              (In the U.S., during the Bush years, John Yoo and partners used "logical reason" to justify torture---which is clearly against any ethico-moral principles...or should be.....)

              Today, (Western) science is divorced from "religion/metaphysics". This means that "nature" which is a created force---becomes the "first principle" or generator of the laws of science.
              From a theistic/Muslim perspective, this is clearly incorrect/incomplete. An UN-created force must be the generator/creator of all creation and its laws. One might say, to posit otherwise is to defy logic and reason---but this is what (Western) science does....

              In order to create harmony of knowledge, both science and scripture must be balanced so that the seen and unseen are understood wholistically.

              How is God understood in Bahai religion? Is "nature" God?
              What is the religious definition of "human" and what is the purpose of this creation?

              From an Islamic paradigm, Humanity was created to do "God's will" which is to have right belief that promotes right intentions that lead to right actions for the benefit of all of God's creations.
              Right belief consists of the principle of Tawheed (Unity) from which all ethico-moral values flow. Therefore religion (Guidance for way of life) is not simply about abstract ethico-moral values---but also about its implementation in life and society (God's laws). Thus Tawheed (Unity) promotes right intentions=Taqwa (God-awareness) which leads to right actions=Ibadah (worship) for the benefit of all of God's creation (Kahlifa=Trusteeship)

              Therefore, the acquisition of (all) knowledge is to help understand the nature/mechanism of the created in order to fulfill the will of the Uncreated which is the obligation/purpose of humanity.

              Without the primary premise of the Uncreated, the pursuit of science becomes shallow and meaningless.....?.....
              Last edited by siam; 03-01-2015, 11:54 PM.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by siam View Post
                I agree with what you have written.

                However, is it right to have blind faith in reason and science?
                My opinion is that blind faith is never right in any pursuit of knowledge....
                I do not believe that 'blind faith' is an issue as far as modern science goes. Despite errors, fraud, bad research and other issues of human incompetence, science is an excellent self correcting body of knowledge concerning our physical existence. I do not believe there are grounds for a selective justification of science based theist beliefs where the problem of 'blind faith' resides.

                [quote[ (In the U.S., during the Bush years, John Yoo and partners used "logical reason" to justify torture---which is clearly against any ethico-moral principles...or should be.....) [/quote]

                I do not believe this is a relevant issue as far as the basic knowledge of science goes. The basic knowledge of the sciences is not responsible as to how it is applied. I do believe religion should be a moral guiding force for science.

                Today, (Western) science is divorced from "religion/metaphysics". This means that "nature" which is a created force---becomes the "first principle" or generator of the laws of science.
                From a theistic/Muslim perspective, this is clearly incorrect/incomplete. An UN-created force must be the generator/creator of all creation and its laws. One might say, to posit otherwise is to defy logic and reason---but this is what (Western) science does....
                Bad attitude, accusations and misinformation. Western science does not either accept nor deny a theistic belief in Creation and God, Atheists do, but that is not science. We need to move beyond this. Methodological Naturalism should be independent of religion, and is at present, concerning the nature of the basic knowledge of our physical existence. It is the failure of religions like Christianity and Islam to consistently support this foundation of science.

                In order to create harmony of knowledge, both science and scripture must be balanced so that the seen and unseen are understood wholistically.
                We agree here, but that is not happening from the perspective of Christianity and Islam. There acceptance of the basic knowledge of science is inconsistent and problematic. Religions role is the moral guidance of the applied sciences to human uses.

                How is God understood in Bahai religion? Is "nature" God?
                What is the religious definition of "human" and what is the purpose of this creation?
                There probably not a whole lot of difference here with Islam. Though the definition of evolution of 'human' would emphasis the more spiritual nature. Humans evolved by our present very reliable knowledge of science physically from the animal kingdom, and there is no reason that this should not be accepted by the evidence. Our spiritual evolution is not dependent on our physical nature.

                One major difference between Judaism, Christianity and Islam and the Baha'i Faith is they all believe that Revelation ended with their Revelation and everything after them is Heretics and they are slaughtered in conflicts as the Baha'is have in some Islamic countries.

                The inconsistency of ancient religions is major issue that makes them flawed and unable to provide consistent guidance for the modern world.

                From an Islamic paradigm, Humanity was created to do "God's will" which is to have right belief that promotes right intentions that lead to right actions for the benefit of all of God's creations.
                Right belief consists of the principle of Tawheed (Unity) from which all ethico-moral values flow. Therefore religion (Guidance for way of life) is not simply about abstract ethico-moral values---but also about its implementation in life and society (God's laws). Thus Tawheed (Unity) promotes right intentions=Taqwa (God-awareness) which leads to right actions=Ibadah (worship) for the benefit of all of God's creation (Kahlifa=Trusteeship)

                Therefore, the acquisition of (all) knowledge is to help understand the nature/mechanism of the created in order to fulfill the will of the Uncreated which is the obligation/purpose of humanity.

                Without the primary premise of the Uncreated, the pursuit of science becomes shallow and meaningless.....?.....
                I understand the Islamic perspective. The problem is the inconsistency in the modern world, which is obvious today.
                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                Frank

                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                Comment


                • if there is a problem---it is that in the "modern world" the acquisition of knowledge is aimless and purposeless or that it is for (selfish) profiteering/greed.

                  Without Tawheed, science has no meaningful purpose....

                  Without purpose, the application of knowledge will be inconsistent. This is because it is not enough to promote the use of knowledge for benefit....it must also be constrained from abuse to harm.
                  In the "modern world" where "secularism" has relegated ethics and morality into a neglected corner----it is essential that we bring back ethico-moral principles to the forefront of our lives.
                  We should not forget our purpose as khalifa(Trusteeship)...

                  Spirituality---I would say that in many religions, our physical nature (and its control/management) plays an important part in spiritual development.
                  That is why God created us with bodies (physical) in the first place.....
                  The management/control of the physical occurs through submission to God's laws (laws of science, Sharia/Halaka/Dharma...), thus natural bodies such as planets, etc submit to God's laws and are therefore in harmony and balance (peace) (...and so, they are "muslim")
                  Likewise, human beings can also achieve balance and harmony (peace) through submission (Islam)

                  What are the Bahai practices or principles whereby one attains spirituality?

                  Conflicts---If there is imbalance and discord in the world it is because people discard Tawheed (Unity) and follow Shirk (Division). So, rather than understanding the Unity ---brotherhood of humanity and Equality (all human beings are of equivalent worth in front of God), they allow the ego (arrogance, pride) and the pursuit of identity to divide them. God does not judge us by our self-assigned identity labels---He will judge us by our intentions...

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by siam View Post
                    if there is a problem---it is that in the "modern world" the acquisition of knowledge is aimless and purposeless or that it is for (selfish) profiteering/greed.

                    Without Tawheed, science has no meaningful purpose....

                    Without purpose, the application of knowledge will be inconsistent. This is because it is not enough to promote the use of knowledge for benefit....it must also be constrained from abuse to harm.
                    In the "modern world" where "secularism" has relegated ethics and morality into a neglected corner----it is essential that we bring back ethico-moral principles to the forefront of our lives.
                    We should not forget our purpose as khalifa(Trusteeship). . .
                    Your failing to address the issue of the thread. The question is not giving science purpose, as well as giving everything in life purpose, which we both acknowledge as the purpose of rleigion. Accepting scientific knowledge concerning the nature of our physical existence is the issue, and Christianity and Islam fail to do this consistently.

                    Your previous statements attacking science as atheist? misses the mark, and actually represents a similar bad attitude and misrepresentation of science creating problems and conflict like the topic of this thread.

                    Science is not materialist in the sense that it rejects the spiritual purpose and nature of our existence. It is neither atheist, agnostic nor theist. By the nature of 'Methodological Naturalism it is neutral to questions of theological purpose, and that is how it should be. There are scientist all over the world who are theists, agnostics, deists, and atheists, and all are devoted to on purpose the 'knowledge of science,'

                    Spirituality---I would say that in many religions, our physical nature (and its control/management) plays an important part in spiritual development.
                    That is why God created us with bodies (physical) in the first place.....
                    The management/control of the physical occurs through submission to God's laws (laws of science, Sharia/Halaka/Dharma...), thus natural bodies such as planets, etc submit to God's laws and are therefore in harmony and balance (peace) (...and so, they are "muslim")
                    Still remains, 'not the issue.' The above should not effect the acceptance of the knowledge of science consistently and without reservation.


                    Likewise, human beings can also achieve balance and harmony (peace) through submission (Islam)
                    Can? Not happening today.

                    What are the Bahai practices or principles whereby one attains spirituality?
                    Submission to the Will of God.

                    Conflicts---If there is imbalance and discord in the world it is because people discard Tawheed (Unity) and follow Shirk (Division). So, rather than understanding the Unity ---brotherhood of humanity and Equality (all human beings are of equivalent worth in front of God), they allow the ego (arrogance, pride) and the pursuit of identity to divide them. God does not judge us by our self-assigned identity labels---He will judge us by our intentions...
                    Basically the problem that is happening in Christianity and Islam today.
                    Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-03-2015, 06:36 AM.
                    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                    go with the flow the river knows . . .

                    Frank

                    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                    Comment


                    • The thread subject---I think both of us have clearly articulated our respective stance on the issue in our previous conversation...there is no need to go over it again? Perhaps we can explore further nuances in terms of generalities?....

                      Purpose---Yes religion gives meaning....which is why that framework should be chosen as the wiser criteria to interpret our "reality"....and not one that is without meaning or purpose....?....

                      Atheism/Theism---I agree that science is not atheist/theist...or whatever...Only meant to point out that without the Tawhidic framework the pursuit of knowledge can become aimless---though even an aimless pursuit of knowledge is better than no pursuit at all.....

                      Reservations---Personally, I think that the nature of knowledge is that it is very vast---but the nature of the intellect is that it is limited (to different degrees in different people) so, all knowledge ---both scriptural and scientific should be accepted with "reservations". Certainty kills the pursuit of knowledge.

                      Todays systems are not Tawhidic, that is, the ideas of justice, equality, liberty, economics, society, governance (including in Muslim-majority countries)....are all based on Hierarchy---not Unity. Hierarchical paradigm is in essence divisive and so goes against the principles of Tawheed.

                      The problem---Because our intellectual abilities are different, there will always be people who can only grasp their world-view in dichotomy. They cannot understand nuances....but, there are many who can. Society must educate our children so that they can have the possibility of a more sophisticated and nuanced understanding of issues. Not all will be able to grasp this and some may never get past simplistic dichotomy. Critical thinking skills are very necessary.

                      How is "will of God" understood/articulated in Bahai religion and what does it mean to "submit" to it?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by siam View Post
                        The thread subject---I think both of us have clearly articulated our respective stance on the issue in our previous conversation...there is no need to go over it again? Perhaps we can explore further nuances in terms of generalities?....
                        I do not really consider the issue adequately resolved, particularly the issue of inconsistency in Christianity and Islam concerning science. Criticism is often met with, '. . . well that does not represent true Islam.' This fails miserably for many reasons. The most prominent is the need for consistent guidance from scripture in the real world for the religion to stand up to its claims.

                        'With so many inconsistencies and failures in the modern world can the real Islam stand up and make a consistent claim? Probably no.

                        Purpose---Yes religion gives meaning....which is why that framework should be chosen as the wiser criteria to interpret our "reality"....and not one that is without meaning or purpose....?....
                        Your again over reaching the purpose and intent of science and the issue of the relationship between religions and science. The purpose of science is to develop the knowledge of our physical existence, not give meaning and purpose to our physical existence. This is the realm of philosophy and theology. You will need to get these issues straight before we can consider anything resolved. Accepting the science of evolution as a matter of sound reliable scientific facts, does not have anything to do with giving science meaning and purpose in the world.

                        Atheism/Theism---I agree that science is not atheist/theist...or whatever...Only meant to point out that without the Tawhidic framework the pursuit of knowledge can become aimless---though even an aimless pursuit of knowledge is better than no pursuit at all.....

                        Todays systems are not Tawhidic, that is, the ideas of justice, equality, liberty, economics, society, governance (including in Muslim-majority countries)....are all based on Hierarchy---not Unity. Hierarchical paradigm is in essence divisive and so goes against the principles of Tawheed.
                        Actually the problem remains an issue. The pursuit of science is knowledge of our physical existence, and it is NOT an aimless pursuit. It is actually more consistent and focused on the simple knowledge of our physical existence then the inconsistent interpretation of the Tawhidic framework in Islam, nor the Creation/science beliefs in today's world.

                        Again to many Islams for consistency as to what is true.

                        Reservations---Personally, I think that the nature of knowledge is that it is very vast---but the nature of the intellect is that it is limited (to different degrees in different people) so, all knowledge ---both scriptural and scientific should be accepted with "reservations". Certainty kills the pursuit of knowledge.
                        First you misinterpret 'certainty' in the pursuit of knowledge in the scientific world. The knowledge of our physical existence in science is dependent on the evolving body of independent knowledge, and not the demands of 'blind faith' certainty based on theological presuppositions of knowledge of our physical existence and not guidance of Divine purpose.

                        The problem---Because our intellectual abilities are different, there will always be people who can only grasp their world-view in dichotomy. They cannot understand nuances....but, there are many who can. Society must educate our children so that they can have the possibility of a more sophisticated and nuanced understanding of issues. Not all will be able to grasp this and some may never get past simplistic dichotomy. Critical thinking skills are very necessary.
                        The problem is again not nuances, nor is it the foggy blue smoke and mirrors of vague certainty. Viewing the world in some sort of poorly defined dichotomy does not help your case as I described before. The failure of Islam and Christianity to provide clear and consistent guidance on the acceptance of scientific knowledge is the issue. In Islam the inconsistent interpretation of Tawhidic doctrine clearly fail to provide the guidance needed.

                        The failures you point out in the Islamic world only reinforce my case. Religions make very strong claims for submission and obedience to the their scripture and belief. If it is as inconsistent and problematic as you describe in the Islamic world then Islam fails miserably in its claim, as well does Christianity.

                        My argument against Christianity and Islam is not that they do not represent Revelation from God (Allah). My argument is that they are ancient guidance and do not meet the consistent guidance needed for today's world. My argument is based on the claim versus the evidence.

                        How is "will of God" understood/articulated in Bahai religion and what does it mean to "submit" to it?
                        The belief of submission to the Will of God, has an important proviso of the 'Independent Search for Truth,' and not the blind faith of carrying on the heritage of one's fore fathers regardless of the evidence. The extreme inconsistencies in Christianity and Islam in the modern world bring to serious question the claims of spiritual guidance to humanity.

                        'Will the real and true Christianity or Islam please stand.'

                        'When many different stand and make the claim they confront each other, start fighting, often brutally and without any sense of compassion for their fellow humans.'
                        Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-05-2015, 09:30 AM.
                        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                        go with the flow the river knows . . .

                        Frank

                        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                        Comment


                        • Thread subject---Your stance is Islam is inconsistent---I disagree, your arguments have not been persuasive....I don't know what more we can say about it....?....

                          Agreement---We both agree that science cannot give meaning and so religion/philosophy needs to do so.
                          Disagreement?---It seems you divorce knowledge into 2 areas---science and religion---In Islam, all knowledge is from God.
                          Disagreement---We both agree that science cannot give meaning. If science cannot give meaning---it is aimless/without meaning.

                          How do you understand "Tawhidic framework"?

                          Failures---An important principle arising from Tawheed is the concept of Equality. The equivalent degree of human worth in front of God/human dignity as an inherent right for all humanity. From this principle comes 2 other ethico-moral considerations, that of rights and responsibilities. These are paired principles---considered together they can create harmony, an imbalance in these creates injustice.

                          The failures in Muslim-majority countries are precisely because "Modern" (hierarchical) values have been implemented by PEOPLE instead of the Tawhidic framework. Some Western/Modern values are hierarchical and inconsistent--which is why non-westerners see the West as hypocrites! By "Modern" I mean Liberalism, Humanism, Naturalism, Secularism, Capitalism and the various other "ism" that have come up in the West. All these systems are based on an idea that a certain privileged segment of society are more entitled than others....this hierarchical idea brought forth other toxic ideas such as American Exceptionalism, Manifest Destiny, Civilizing Mission...etc that caused the West to exploit and oppress others in order to obtain luxury, power, privilege, for the "entitled few". Many Muslim-Majority countries (former colonies) have retained this framework so that the "elites" have unearned privileges that are denied to others in their society (as have Western societies).

                          The correction of this problem lies in discarding the notion that a select few are entitled to privilege and going back to the Tawhidic framework of Equality and Dignity for all humanity. A system based on such a framework will pave the way for more justice for all peoples in society.....

                          I am not proposing that Muslims "Go back" to some mythic Utopian ideal---rather, that all humanity must critically re-examine and reconsider our "systems" and perhaps find creative ways to correct the problems using the best in our traditions. For Muslims---this would be the Tawhidic framework.....God's wisdom is timeless. With our intellect and creativity, we can find ways to bring justice, equality, dignity and liberty to our societies....

                          "Real" Islam---This can be a dangerous concept. It is a way of thinking that encourages exclusivity, dogmatism, and intolerance. (Takfirism). Rather, it is better to accept, as the Quran itself explains---that God created us in diversity so that we may learn from each other. Creativity necessitates different ways of thinking (thinking outside the box). Without creativity(and its diversity), humanity would stagnate.....

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by siam View Post
                            Thread subject---Your stance is Islam is inconsistent---I disagree, your arguments have not been persuasive....I don't know what more we can say about it....?....
                            My argument for inconsistency has been based on actual 'facts' of problems in the Islamic world. You have not responded with an adequate argument that explains the 'facts' of inconsistency.

                            Agreement---We both agree that science cannot give meaning and so religion/philosophy needs to do so.
                            Not necessarily agree. Your statements below reflect this.

                            Disagreement?---It seems you divorce knowledge into 2 areas---science and religion---In Islam, all knowledge is from God.
                            Actually I have never done this. Yes, all knowledge is from God, but the problem becomes the inconsistent consideration of basic sciences as accurately reflecting our Creation by Natural Law. The problem of inconsistency still remains that many, up to more then 50% do not accept the science of evolution as described by science. The problem is in your court as some how separating the knowledge of science as NOT reflecting how God created our physical existence. cience sees our physical existence as God Created it, and there should a divorce of the two types of knowledge.

                            Disagreement---We both agree that science cannot give meaning. If science cannot give meaning---it is aimless/without meaning.
                            NO, we do not both agree that science cannot give meaning. The meaning of science is the knowledge of the nature of our physical existence. The meaning in in religion is the Divine purpose of this knowledge. Your use of 'aimless/without meaning' is problematic and large part of the reason for the distrust, inconsistency and contradictions of how Christians and Muslims view science. In terms of the nature of the factual knowledge of our physical existence in the modern world, science is more focused and consistent. The 'blind faith' in ancient worldviews remain a problem in Christianity and Islam.

                            You have failed to demonstrate the problem of being 'aimless/without meaning' as a problem in the foundation of the basic sciences; Physics, Chemistry, Biology and Geology. Where is the problem???

                            How do you understand "Tawhidic framework"?
                            Tawheed is basically affirming the belief of Islam based on the central belief that there is no God but God, and the framework (divine guidance) is the foundation based on the Quran and actually tradition depending on which school of Islam one follows. Yes, the concept of equality is an important concept, but once you move outside one particular school of Islam, equality becomes a shaky principle as to who is equal and who is not. This is actually too vague a framework to give specific consistent guidance in the modern world. The issue of evolution is an example. What Tawhidic principle would you appeal to to reject that humans did not evolve from animal genetic roots?

                            In terms of the Baha'i Faith the Tawhidic Framework (Divine guidance). Concerning science and evolution, the guidance in the writings is specific and science is the standard as the evolving physical knowledge of our physical existence. The Divine guidance rules in the application (purpose an motive) of the basic sciences to applied sciences and the benefit of humanity and God's Creation (protecting the environment.)

                            Failures---An important principle arising from Tawheed is the concept of Equality. The equivalent degree of human worth in front of God/human dignity as an inherent right for all humanity. From this principle comes 2 other ethico-moral considerations, that of rights and responsibilities. These are paired principles---considered together they can create harmony, an imbalance in these creates injustice.
                            As above, this is applied too inconsistently in the modern world where harmony and justice is equated radically differently and inconsistently between different schools of Islam, and on the big scale Shiites and Sunnis cannot resolve the problem of equality and justice to include all of Islam. In most Islamic countries, minorities like Baha'is, even Jews and Christians are not considered equal under the harmony and justice of their particular Tawhidic framework.

                            The failures in Muslim-majority countries are precisely because "Modern" (hierarchical) values have been implemented by PEOPLE instead of the Tawhidic framework. Some Western/Modern values are hierarchical and inconsistent--which is why non-westerners see the West as hypocrites! By "Modern" I mean Liberalism, Humanism, Naturalism, Secularism, Capitalism and the various other "ism" that have come up in the West. All these systems are based on an idea that a certain privileged segment of society are more entitled than others....this hierarchical idea brought forth other toxic ideas such as American Exceptionalism, Manifest Destiny, Civilizing Mission...etc that caused the West to exploit and oppress others in order to obtain luxury, power, privilege, for the "entitled few". Many Muslim-Majority countries (former colonies) have retained this framework so that the "elites" have unearned privileges that are denied to others in their society (as have Western societies).
                            There remains an inconsistency in Islamic countries with out the 'old colonial framework' in terms of the Tawhidic framework does not treat minorities with equality and justice that is equal.

                            The correction of this problem lies in discarding the notion that a select few are entitled to privilege and going back to the Tawhidic framework of Equality and Dignity for all humanity. A system based on such a framework will pave the way for more justice for all peoples in society.....
                            Where would you give an example where this Islamic Tawhidic framework exists and the minorities, such as Baha'is, Christians and Jews are in reality treated with justice and equality.

                            I am not proposing that Muslims "Go back" to some mythic Utopian ideal---rather, that all humanity must critically re-examine and reconsider our "systems" and perhaps find creative ways to correct the problems using the best in our traditions. For Muslims---this would be the Tawhidic framework.....God's wisdom is timeless. With our intellect and creativity, we can find ways to bring justice, equality, dignity and liberty to our societies....
                            I consider this an unrealistic illusionary Utopian ideal. Can you give an example where this exists in any place in the world today?

                            "Real" Islam---This can be a dangerous concept. It is a way of thinking that encourages exclusivity, dogmatism, and intolerance. (Takfirism). Rather, it is better to accept, as the Quran itself explains---that God created us in diversity so that we may learn from each other. Creativity necessitates different ways of thinking (thinking outside the box). Without creativity(and its diversity), humanity would stagnate.....
                            "Real Islam" as with "Real Christianity or Judaism" can be a very dangerous concept. The challenge still stands on where does this remotely exist in the real world where anything approaching 'equality and justice' even comes close regarding taking into consideration the diversity of religions and cultures outside Islam.
                            Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-06-2015, 09:28 AM.
                            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                            go with the flow the river knows . . .

                            Frank

                            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                            Comment


                            • So...your argument is that Muslims are inconsistent because they do not accept science without reservation--or---blindly?
                              Scientists say that the nature of scientific inquiry is that it is evolving and what is known today may be proven false tomorrow....So, it may be the wiser, more consistent stance to accept science with the same reservations that scientists themselves accept science....?.....

                              I think it is very consistent to avoid blind faith in the pursuit of any branch of knowledge because blind certainty kills knowledge.

                              Creation by Natural law--Again this will depend on the premise. If the premise is neutral on the nature of the "Creator force" then such a conclusion is acceptable---but if the premise is that "Nature" is the force that generates "natural law" then such a premise is flawed/incomplete and cannot be accepted without reservations.....There are real ramifications to a world-view/paradigm without Tawheed and with Tawheed.

                              Tawheed(Unity)---you are correct in the generalities---but allow me to explain anyway....
                              Islamic theology begins and ends with two words---One God. Nothing is added or subtracted from this concept/principle. But---there are ramifications of this idea in terms of paradigm(world-view). How one views ethico-moral principles, equality, justice,...etc is profoundly influenced by Tawheed. (Tawheed=Unity)
                              So, ...take the concept of Equality as an example.
                              If there is only One God (and none other)---only One Creator, then all humanity is created by the One God (and none other.) Therefore, all humanity, is equally inferior to the Creator, the One God---only God is Most Superior, none other. This means that Equality (all human beings are of equivalent worth) is an inherent value assigned by God---not proclaimed by "Nature" or by Human.

                              But---human reason can deceive---for example, American Exceptionalism proclaims that the United States is the best, most exceptional nation on Earth..(and so proceeds to destroy other nations without remorse).....or the many ways people tried to "prove" the Black "race" was inferior---http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism---which led to people Like Abraham Lincoln saying things like---"There is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races from living together on terms of social and political equality."---which then led to specific policies and laws of discrimination such as Jim Crow/segregation and Intelligence testing 1924...and various other more troubling aspects such as public lynchings---http://www.iviews.com/Articles/articles.asp?ref=IV1503-6028

                              In other words---Wrong belief can promote wrong intentions that lead to wrong actions that can harm God's creations.
                              The Tawhidic framework can help promote right belief that creates benefits and restrain us from wrong beliefs that create harm.

                              The essence of the Tawhidic framework is to promote Unity. Under this framework all of humanity are "Bani Adam"---Children of Adam/One Family. It is this paradigm that prompts the 4th Caliph to say "You are either my brother in faith or my equal in humanity"---Ali ibn Abu Talib, or for the Prophet to say "There is no superiority for an Arab over a non-Arab, nor for a non-Arab over an Arab, nor for a fair-skinned person over a person with dark skin, nor for a dark-skinned person over a person with fair skin. Whoever is more pious and God-fearing is more deserving of honour.’"
                              To some degree---this sentiment is practiced during the Hajj where all peoples gather together as one community, as equals and as family.....

                              Today the Tawhidic framework is not applied (nor understood) anywhere. Equality has been reduced to the limited concept of "equal opportunity". This, means that as long as society provides means of equal "opportunity", the obligation to equality is completed--so, in the U.S., if POC have the "opportunity" to go to school same as everyone, "Equality" has been served---nevermind that these schools and their environment is substandard......These types of errors occur because without the Tawhidic framework, there is no way to acknowledge the inherent--God-given---right of dignity and equal value of all humanity.

                              That is why many Muslims in Muslim-majority countries are calling for Islamic values in governance, law, society, economics....etc. It is a desire to correct the problems many see in our societies/our world today.....

                              According to Islamic belief---this "Tawhidic framework" is not exclusive to "Islam"...God, Most Compassionate, Most Merciful, has given this Guidance to all humanity, and if they look into their Wisdom Teachings, they will probably find it..... and if they cannot find it...they are welcome to borrow it from Islam.....

                              I do not advocate a rejection of genetic roots/evolution---All I am saying is that various ramifications have to be considered and until they are fully considered, Muslims would be wise to keep the issue on hold rather than fall into the errors that caused scientific racism and such problems.......

                              Human evolution---A side effect (for some) of "evolution" may be the idea of linearity that presumes that things evolved from simple to complex. In terms of human evolution, this presupposes that the previous lineages were "less smart"/more "primitive" than the later lineages.....this is too close to the ideas of racism to make me comfortable and I think it would be wise to put more thought into the ramifications of this way of thinking before accepting it "without reservations" as you say.....?.......

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by siam View Post
                                So...your argument is that Muslims are inconsistent because they do not accept science without reservation--or---blindly?
                                Scientists say that the nature of scientific inquiry is that it is evolving and what is known today may be proven false tomorrow....So, it may be the wiser, more consistent stance to accept science with the same reservations that scientists themselves accept science....?.....
                                There is a consistent problem in the theme of your posts concerning a negative view of science from a religious perspective common to many in both Christianity and Islam. You have made many accusations of 'without reservation, blind faith, materialism, and aimless without purpose.' None of this has been constructive nor meaningful regardless of whether you accept the scientific view of evolution or not. Science does not accept things 'without reservation or blind faith.' Science is based on the physical evidence, and there is always skepticism and search for new evidence change the knowledge of science.

                                What you have proposed in this post and previous posts is absolutely NOT the same reservations that scientist consider in their view of scientific knowledge. The fact that the knowledge of science changes over time is not grounds not to accept the knowledge of science as we have today. Though our knowledge of science will advance and change there is much of the basics of science that will not likely change. The advances in science over time for the most part is the addition of knowledge, particularly in theoretical physics and not change as viewed by layman.

                                I think it is very consistent to avoid blind faith in the pursuit of any branch of knowledge because blind certainty kills knowledge.
                                Again and again and again and again, the knowledge of science is not based on any sort of 'blind faith.' In the real world of Christianity and Islam 'blind faith; often tries to 'kill knowledge. You may not agree, but the actual facts of history are on my side. You have failed to show where 'bling faith' in science has led to the 'killing of knowledge.'

                                Creation by Natural law--Again this will depend on the premise. If the premise is neutral on the nature of the "Creator force" then such a conclusion is acceptable---but if the premise is that "Nature" is the force that generates "natural law" then such a premise is flawed/incomplete and cannot be accepted without reservations.....There are real ramifications to a world-view/paradigm without Tawheed and with Tawheed.
                                Repeated over, over and over again; science is neutral as the nature or question of Creative Force or no Creative Force.

                                Tawheed(Unity)---you are correct in the generalities---but allow me to explain anyway....
                                Islamic theology begins and ends with two words---One God. Nothing is added or subtracted from this concept/principle. But---there are ramifications of this idea in terms of paradigm(world-view). How one views ethico-moral principles, equality, justice,...etc is profoundly influenced by Tawheed. (Tawheed=Unity)
                                So, ...take the concept of Equality as an example.
                                If there is only One God (and none other)---only One Creator, then all humanity is created by the One God (and none other.) Therefore, all humanity, is equally inferior to the Creator, the One God---only God is Most Superior, none other. This means that Equality (all human beings are of equivalent worth) is an inherent value assigned by God---not proclaimed by "Nature" or by Human.
                                This need not be repeated explained. The problem comes with the insistence of a strict Islamic (Koranic) only understanding, and I believe the unity claimed is lost.

                                But---human reason can deceive---for example, American Exceptionalism proclaims that the United States is the best, most exceptional nation on Earth..(and so proceeds to destroy other nations without remorse).....or the many ways people tried to "prove" the Black "race" was inferior---http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism---which led to people Like Abraham Lincoln saying things like---"There is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races from living together on terms of social and political equality."---which then led to specific policies and laws of discrimination such as Jim Crow/segregation and Intelligence testing 1924...and various other more troubling aspects such as public lynchings---http://www.iviews.com/Articles/articles.asp?ref=IV1503-6028
                                Careful with statements like 'human reason can deceive . . .' with selective citations. There are many troubling aspects of violence, executions, persecution, and ethnic cleansing in the Islamic world that can bring to question 'reason and motivation.

                                In other words---Wrong belief can promote wrong intentions that lead to wrong actions that can harm God's creations.
                                The Tawhidic framework can help promote right belief that creates benefits and restrain us from wrong beliefs that create harm.
                                This can also very true in the Islamic world as any other, and history is a witness to this.

                                The essence of the Tawhidic framework is to promote Unity. Under this framework all of humanity are "Bani Adam"---Children of Adam/One Family. It is this paradigm that prompts the 4th Caliph to say "You are either my brother in faith or my equal in humanity"---Ali ibn Abu Talib, or for the Prophet to say "There is no superiority for an Arab over a non-Arab, nor for a non-Arab over an Arab, nor for a fair-skinned person over a person with dark skin, nor for a dark-skinned person over a person with fair skin. Whoever is more pious and God-fearing is more deserving of honour.’"
                                To some degree---this sentiment is practiced during the Hajj where all peoples gather together as one community, as equals and as family.....
                                This has never been a problem of understanding, even form the Baha'i perspective. There is most definitely a problem of arguing this in reality from the Islamic perspective in recent history.

                                Today the Tawhidic framework is not applied (nor understood) anywhere. Equality has been reduced to the limited concept of "equal opportunity". This, means that as long as society provides means of equal "opportunity", the obligation to equality is completed--so, in the U.S., if POC have the "opportunity" to go to school same as everyone, "Equality" has been served---nevermind that these schools and their environment is substandard......These types of errors occur because without the Tawhidic framework, there is no way to acknowledge the inherent--God-given---right of dignity and equal value of all humanity.
                                This clearly reflects a problem between your claims and the reality of Islam in the real world.

                                That is why many Muslims in Muslim-majority countries are calling for Islamic values in governance, law, society, economics....etc. It is a desire to correct the problems many see in our societies/our world today.....
                                I realize this, but so far the implementation of Islamic governance has a decidedly negative impact on freedom of expression, press and religious liberties of non-Muslims. For example, forcing non-Muslims to comply with Islamic religious law.
                                Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-10-2015, 09:02 AM.
                                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                                Frank

                                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X