| Charles Darwin |
In the introduction, we saw that the theory of evolution was constructed upon materialist philosophy. The materialist view claims that the universe consists of matter and that matter is the only thing that exists. Therefore, matter has existed for all time and no other power rules over it. Materialists believe that blind coincidence caused the universe to shape itself and life to come about by gradually evolving from non-living substances. In other words, all living things in the world emerged as the result of natural influences and chance.
Materialist philosophy uses the theory of evolution, both of which complement each other, to account for the emergence of life. This unity, which was born in ancient Greece, once again was made public under the primitive scientific conditions of the nineteenth century and, since the theory allegedly backed up materialism, whether or not it had any scientific validity, it was adopted immediately by materialists.
The fact of creation stands in opposition to the theory of evolution. According to the creationist view, matter has not existed for all time and therefore is controlled. God created matter out of nothing and gave it order. All things, living as well as non-living, came into being by God's creation. The amazing design, calculation, equilibrium, and order seen in the universe and in living things are clear evidence of this.
| |
Modern science demonstrates the invalidity of the materialist-evolutionist claim and confirms creation. Contrary to the theory of evolution, all the proofs of creation that surround us show that chance had no role in the universe's coming into existence. Every detail that emerges as we observe the sky, Earth, and all living things is intended as evidence of God's great power and wisdom.
Muslims cannot seek a compromise on this issue. Of course people can think as they please and can believe in whatever theories they wish. However, there can be no compromise with a theory that denies Allah and His creation, for this would involve compromising on religion's fundamental element. Of course, doing so is totally unacceptable.
Evolutionists, aware of how such a compromise would damage religion, encourage religious people to try and find such a compromise.
At this point, the view of creation by evolution comes to the materialists' aid. This is one of the tactics used by the evolutionists to appease the supporters of creation (or "Intelligent Design") and to weaken their intellectual position against the dogma of Darwinism. Although evolutionists do not believe in God, for they have made a deity out of chance and totally oppose the fact of creation, they think that their theory will become more acceptable if they remain silent about the religious evolutionists' idea that God created living things through evolution. In fact, they encourage a compromise between the theory and religion so that evolution will become more acceptable and belief in creation will weaken.
Given this, Muslims must understand that it is totally mistaken to believe that Allah created the universe and yet support the theory of evolution despite the lack of hard scientific evidence. Furthermore, it is just as mistaken to claim that evolution is compatible with the Qur'an by ignoring all the warnings in the Holy Book itself. Muslims who adopt such a position must realize that they are supporting an idea designed to help materialist philosophy and that, given this fact, they must withdraw their support at once.
If they come upon you, they will be your enemies and stretch out their hands and tongues against you with evil intent, and they would dearly love you to disbelieve. (Qur'an, 60: 2) |
| "THE THOUGHT OF THE EYE MADE ME COLD ALL OVER!" One of the most insoluble dilemmas for the theory of evolution is the complex structures in living things. For instance, evolutionists claim that the eye, made up of some 40 different parts, came about by chance. Yet they cannot explain how it did so. In fact, it is impossible that blind chance should have "created" such a magnificent structure. The diagram below shows some of the eye's components. |
A careful examination of Darwinist publications reveals this fact quite clearly. Their accounts are almost never based upon firm scientific proof. The fundamental areas where the theory collapses are glossed over in a few words, and many fantastic scenarios are written about natural history. They never dwell on such essential questions as how life first emerged from inanimate substances, the fossil record's huge gaps, and the complex systems in living things. They do not do so because whatever they might say or write would contradict their aims and reveal the emptiness of their theory.
When Charles Darwin (1809-82), the founder of this theory, considered one of the complex systems in living things, in this case the eye, he realized the danger that this posed to his theory and even admitted that thinking about the eye made him cold all over. Like Darwin, today's evolutionist scientists know that their theory has no answer for such complex systems. But instead of admitting this, they seek to overcome the lack of scientific evidence by writing imaginary scenarios and imposing the theory on people by giving it a scientific mask.
Such methods become obvious during face-to-face debates between evolutionists and those who believe in creation, as well as in evolutionist writings and documentaries. Actually, evolutionists are not bothered by such things as scientific truth or reason, for their sole goal is to make people believe that evolution is a scientific fact.
However, given that evolution and creation are diametrically opposed, proving one means disproving the other. In other words, disproving evolution means proving creation.
For these reasons, materialists see debates on evolution as a kind of battleground, a direct ideological struggle rather than a scientific matter. Thus they resort to all possible means to obstruct those who believe in creation.
For example, evolutionist Lerry Flank recommends that the truth of creation be opposed by the following methods:
Creationist watchers must keep a close eye on the composition of state education boards. Ideally, people who are interested in quality education and in keeping the fundamentalists from using the public schools for their sermonizing should constitute the majority of these state boards... If this fails, and creationist textbooks are actually adopted and approved, then legal action becomes necessary.1
It is clear from these words that we are not talking about a scientific debate, but a war of ideas waged by evolutionists in a framework of certain strategies. Muslims who defend evolution must be aware of this. Darwinism is not a scientific thesis; rather, it is a system of thought designed to lead people to deny God. As this theory has no scientific foundation, Muslims must not allow themselves to be misled by its arguments and thereby give it any support, no matter how well-intentioned.
| Prof. Arda Denkel |
Arda Denkel, an evolutionist professor of philosophy at The Bosphorus University, probably the most prestigious one in Turkey, even admitted the erroneous nature of this method:
Does the fact that many respected people or organizations or bodies believe in it prove the theory of evolution to be true? Could the theory be proved by a court verdict? Does the fact that respected and powerful people believe in something make it true? I would like to recall a historical fact. Did not Galileo stand up before all the respected people, lawyers, and particularly scientists of his time and speak the truth on his own, with no support from anyone? Did not the courts of the Inquisition reveal other, similar situations? Gaining the support of respected and influential circles neither creates the truth nor has anything to do with scientific fact.2
As Denkel noted, wide acceptance of a theory does not prove its truth. In fact, the history of science is full of examples of theories that were first accepted by a minority and then only later came to be accepted as true by the majority.
Moreover, evolution is not accepted by the entire scientific community, as its proponents would have people believe. Over the last 20-30 years, the number of scientists rejecting it has risen enormously. Most of them abandon their dogmatic belief in Darwinism after seeing the flawless design in the universe and living things. They have published countless works demonstrating the theory's invalidity. Even more important, they are members of prominent universities all over the world, especially in the United States and Europe, and experts and career academics in biology, biochemistry, microbiology, anatomy, paleontology, and other scientific fields.3 Therefore it would be very wrong to say that the majority of the scientific community believes in evolution.
Many contemporary scientists reject evolution and accept that God, the Lord of Infinite Intelligence and Might, created the universe. Some of the scientists who accept the truth of creation are, from left to right, Owen Gingerich, professor of astronomy and history of science at Harvard University; Carl Friedrich von Weizsacker, professor of physics at Germany's Max-Planck-Gesellschaft University; Donald Chittick, professor of chemistry at Oregon State University; Robert Matthews, professor of physics at Oxford University; Michael J. Behe, professor of biology at Lehigh University; David Menton, professor of anatomy at Washington University; S. Jocelyn Bell Burnell, professor of physics at the Open University in England; and William Dembski, associate professor in the conceptual foundations of science at Baylor University. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
He Who created the seven heavens in layers. You will not find any flaw in the creation of the All-Merciful. Look again -do you see any gaps? Then look again and again. Your sight will return to you dazzled and exhausted! (Qur'an, 67: 3-4) |
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder