Question On Dinasours

kulareggae

As a convert I dont know what to believe on Dinasours. Can you clear my issue with Islamic perspective on Dinasours.
Thanks

Forgotten_1

kulareggae wrote: »

As a convert I dont know what to believe on Dinasours. Can you clear my issue with Islamic perspective on Dinasours.
Thanks

Dear Kulareggae, There is no moral ill in believing the Dinasours existed or not

---

specifically , the Quran doesn't speak about dinosaurs--only those beliefs are wrong which bring mischief on earth-- Like belief in multiple deities.. .. taking humanity as lord... taking prophets as lord... taking jesus as lord-- taking chance as lord...

kulareggae

yh i dont know if i wud belive it as its not in Quaran. I think its better i say Allah knows best on this matter
Thanks

fedor.2.

kulareggae wrote: »

yh i dont know if i wud belive it as its not in Quaran. I think its better i say Allah knows best on this matter
Thanks

WTF.

Gumbi

There seems to be an implication here that if it's not in the Qu'ran, then it doesn't exist, regardless of the factual reality. That's a dangerously unhealthy perspective.

HHobo

Gumbi wrote: »

There seems to be an implication here that if it's not in the Qu'ran, then it doesn't exist, regardless of the factual reality. That's a dangerously unhealthy perspective.

Dangerously unhealthy maybe but wonderfully Qur'anic.

Gumbi

HHobo wrote: »

Dangerously unhealthy maybe but wonderfully Qur'anic.

And yet, dangerously unhealthy. Seriously, we actually have a thread regarding the very existence of "dinasours"?

iDave

Whats not to believe they have fossils

hivizman

Just as with Christians, Muslims embrace a wide range of views regarding evolution. Many Muslims hold the view that there is nothing in the Qur'an or in the tradition of the prophet Muhammad that contradicts a Darwinian view of biological evolution. This would include a full acceptance of the standard palaeontological accounts of the existence of dinosaurs.

Some Muslims accept standard accounts of evolution for plants and non-human animals but believe that humanity stands outside these ideas - these Muslims also have no problem with the existence of dinosaurs, but they would challenge the view that humans evolved from non-sapient primates.

Finally, many Muslims reject evolution and hold to creationist views not unlike those of some Christians. However, even these Muslims tend to interpret the Qur'an as contradicting a "young world" viewpoint that would see the world as having been created only a few thousand years, complete with fossils.

So few mainstream Muslims would question the existence of dinosaurs.

Gumbi

hivizman wrote: »

Just as with Christians, Muslims embrace a wide range of views regarding evolution. Many Muslims hold the view that there is nothing in the Qur'an or in the tradition of the prophet Muhammad that contradicts a Darwinian view of biological evolution. This would include a full acceptance of the standard palaeontological accounts of the existence of dinosaurs.

Some Muslims accept standard accounts of evolution for plants and non-human animals but believe that humanity stands outside these ideas - these Muslims also have no problem with the existence of dinosaurs, but they would challenge the view that humans evolved from non-sapient primates.

Finally, many Muslims reject evolution and hold to creationist views not unlike those of some Christians. However, even these Muslims tend to interpret the Qur'an as contradicting a "young world" viewpoint that would see the world as having been created only a few thousand years, complete with fossils.

So few mainstream Muslims would question the existence of dinosaurs.

Again, there is an implication here that the Qu'ran alone dictates truth regardless of reality. Would you not agree that reality comes first?

The OP, for example, automatically disregarded fossil evidence (reality) and took the stance that "if it isn't in the Qu'ran, then it's not true". A seriously unhealthy perspective in my opinion.

endacl

kulareggae wrote: »

yh i dont know if i wud belive it as its not in Quaran. I think its better i say Allah knows best on this matter
Thanks

Hi OP. Do you believe in marbles, traffic lights and icecream? I don't recall they warranted a mention at all? What about helicopters?

El_Duderino 09

HHobo wrote: »

Dangerously unhealthy maybe but wonderfully Qur'anic.

This thread is the result of a Qur'anic irrigation.

endacl wrote: »

Hi OP. Do you believe in , and ? I don't recall they warranted a mention at all? What about ?

Easy

kulareggae

sarcasm lads i was asking a genuine question, its all good

hivizman

kulareggae wrote: »

sarcasm lads i was asking a genuine question, its all good

A recent book by Nidhal Guessoum Islam's Quantum Question: Reconciling Muslim Tradition and Modern Science (London: I B Tauris, 2011: ISBN 9781848855182) includes a substantial (54-page) chapter on Islam and evolution. Guessoum, who is an astrophysicist currently working in the UAE (see his website http://nidhalguessoum.org/), adopts what is sometimes referred to as a "theistic evolution" position - holding that evolution is the biological mechanism created by God that has ultimately led to the emergence of homo sapiens. Theistic evolutionists accept the empirical findings and conclusions of non-theistic evolutionists, so they would certainly have no problems with the existence of dinosaurs. They deny, however, suggestions that evolution is ultimately driven by random processes such as random genetic mutation.

Guessoum discusses how some Muslim scholars differentiate human development from general biological evolution. They argue that humanity was specially created by God, rather than emerging from the evolutionary process that applies to all other species. Guessoum concludes that modern Islamic creationists, who reject evolution, have largely followed the arguments and methods of Christian fundamentalists, including "a simplistic, literalistic reading of the scriptures" (p. 324) - Guessoum suggests that more nuanced readings are quite consistent with an acceptance of the empirical validity of evolutionary theory.

The general principle of applying the Qur'an and Sunnah to the "real world" is: if it's a matter of worship, then anything not in the Qur'an or Sunnah is an innovation, to be avoided, but if it's not a matter of worship, then anything not specifically prohibited in the Qur'an or Sunnah is permitted. There's nothing, as far as I'm aware, in either the Qur'an or the Sunnah that would contradict the existence of dinosaurs, so you can safely carry on believing in them on the strength of the scientific evidence for their existence.

Mark Hamill

hivizman wrote: »

Guessoum discusses how some Muslim scholars differentiate human development from general biological evolution. They argue that humanity was specially created by God, rather than emerging from the evolutionary process that applies to all other species.

As in humans didn't evolve at all (ie the first two? humans were just placed here by god sometime in the past) or the evolution of humans from apes was directed by god?

El_Duderino 09

kulareggae wrote: »

sarcasm lads i was asking a genuine question, its all good

If its a serious question about dinosaurs existence shouldn't you consider asking in a more appropriate forum? If your question is about whether to believe in things which are not mentioned in your religious workbook then I suggest you know the answer by the fact that you are using a computer which is not mentioned in your book.

Feel free to wonder if your computer exists... Actually were you mentioned in the workbook... how do you know you exist?

If the point was to show you are such a good muslim that you would be willing to pretend things don't exist because it is not mentioned in the workbook then give yourself a pat on the back buddy. Just keep that kind of nonsense thinking for impressing fellow muslims.

As an example of how you wouldnt even consider using this kind of thinking in reality: would you get out of the way of a car coming towards you? why bother? they are not mentioned in the book so they might not even exist.

So I doubt it was a genuine question about anything. Could I ask the other muslims in this forum who are impressed by that kind of thinking to give you a clap though... You earned that at least for selling your intellect.

fedor.2.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

If its a serious question about dinosaurs existence shouldn't you consider asking in a more appropriate forum? If your question is about whether to believe in things which are not mentioned in your religious workbook then I suggest you know the answer by the fact that you are using a computer which is not mentioned in your book.

Feel free to wonder if your computer exists... Actually were you mentioned in the workbook... how do you know you exist?

If the point was to show you are such a good muslim that you would be willing to pretend things don't exist because it is not mentioned in the workbook then give yourself a pat on the back buddy. Just keep that kind of nonsense thinking for impressing fellow muslims.

As an example of how you wouldnt even consider using this kind of thinking in reality: would you get out of the way of a car coming towards you? why bother? they are not mentioned in the book so they might not even exist.

So I doubt it was a genuine question about anything. Could I ask the other muslims in this forum who are impressed by that kind of thinking to give you a clap though... You earned that at least for selling your intellect.

Just came in to this twilight zone to thank this post.

kulareggae

i wanted to know its a genuine question and from now on il ring the malim and ask thanks guys

dlofnep

kulareggae wrote: »

i wanted to know its a genuine question and from now on il ring the malim and ask thanks guys

It's genuinely absurd to ask whether or not dinosaurs existed. It is a matter of fact that they existed. Let's suppose a leading Islamic authority that you respect advised you that dinosaurs did not exist, because it wasn't stated in the Qur'an - Would you then reject that dinosaurs existed irrespective of how compelling the evidence is?

dlofnep

hivizman wrote: »

A recent book by Nidhal Guessoum Islam's Quantum Question: Reconciling Muslim Tradition and Modern Science (London: I B Tauris, 2011: ISBN 9781848855182) includes a substantial (54-page) chapter on Islam and evolution. Guessoum, who is an astrophysicist currently working in the UAE (see his website http://nidhalguessoum.org/), adopts what is sometimes referred to as a "theistic evolution" position - holding that evolution is the biological mechanism created by God that has ultimately led to the emergence of homo sapiens.

The notion that a creator would create life a billion years ago, ultimately leading to homo sapiens through arbitrary genetic mutations & natural selection in silly. There is a reason it's called natural selection.

hivizman wrote: »

Theistic evolutionists accept the empirical findings and conclusions of non-theistic evolutionists, so they would certainly have no problems with the existence of dinosaurs. They deny, however, suggestions that evolution is ultimately driven by random processes such as random genetic mutation.

Evolution is not driven by random processes, it is driven by natural selection which is nonrandom.

hivizman wrote: »

Guessoum discusses how some Muslim scholars differentiate human development from general biological evolution. They argue that humanity was specially created by God, rather than emerging from the evolutionary process that applies to all other species.

Well, since the emergence of DNA - we know for a fact that that is not the case. Homo sapiens are the result of a long chain of evolution, and the genetic evidence quite clearly points to a common ancestor between humans and all other living creatures - including most recently other apes.

endacl

kulareggae wrote: »

i wanted to know its a genuine question and from now on il ring the malim and ask thanks guys

Good solution. That sounds safer.

Gumbi

I've already commented in the implication here that the Qu'ran dictates the belief of this person, regardless of reality.

Very, very dangerous.

hivizman

Mark Hamill wrote: »

As in humans didn't evolve at all (ie the first two? humans were just placed here by god sometime in the past) or the evolution of humans from apes was directed by god?

The second of these (the evolution of humans from apes was directed by god) is basically "theistic evolution". The first of these (humans didn't evolve at all) is a form of "special creation". Originally, "special creation" was the view that all species were created directly by God, but it became narrowed down to the belief that only the human species was created by God. This was Roman Catholic dogma from 1909, but more recently the Roman Catholic church has dropped special creation entirely.

Many modern Muslims accept evolution, frequently in the theistic form, but some Muslims exclude humans from this and adopt a special creation perspective, with Adam as the first human being. The main source for this in the Qur'an is Surat al-Hij'r (15:26-29), which describes how God created the first human from clay and breathed His spirit into the clay. Muslims who give these verses a literal meaning deny that humans are an outcome of evolution, even if they accept evolution for other species.

El_Duderino 09

kulareggae wrote: »

i wanted to know its a genuine question and from now on il ring the malim and ask thanks guys

Good idea... so long as your malim is a paleontologist.

confusedquark

Gumbi wrote: »

I've already commented in the implication here that the Qu'ran dictates the belief of this person, regardless of reality.

Very, very dangerous.

Have just read through the thread, and just wanted to make a quick point or two. Whilst fossils do indeed point towards the existence of dinosaurs, the OP might not know a lot about fossils and what they signify, or he might know a bit about them, but not enough that he's 100% convinced.

The Qur'an isn't an encyclopaedia of human knowledge - it's a guidebook on how best to live your life. Therefore it's wrong to dismiss the existence of things prior to (or indeed after) its revelation on the basis that there's no mention of them in it. However, it's still reasonable to inquire in the first instance, because if the Qur'an does address that issue, then you have your answer.

The reality of dinosaurs - creatures from millions of years ago, which we didn't know anything about until their fossils were discovered, and we worked backwards from there to get a grasp on them - is a very different thing to the reality of things which we can physically see and touch today, so give the lad a break.

Regarding the wider implication of the Qur'an dictating a person's beliefs, well, that's kind of the whole point. We believe that the Qur'an is the literal word of God, and therefore try to live our lives by it. But equally, you're right that one still has to be rational and question things. There can be different interpretations of certain parts of the Qur'an, and some people deliberately misinterpret parts or take them out of context for political means or whatever and it absolutely can be dangerous then. As Einstein said, science without religion is lame, and religion without science is blind.

Gumbi

confusedquark wrote: »

Have just read through the thread, and just wanted to make a quick point or two. Whilst fossils do indeed point towards the existence of dinosaurs, the OP might not know a lot about fossils and what they signify, or he might know a bit about them, but not enough that he's 100% convinced.

The Qur'an isn't an encyclopaedia of human knowledge - it's a guidebook on how best to live your life. Therefore it's wrong to dismiss the existence of things prior to (or indeed after) its revelation on the basis that there's no mention of them in it. However, it's still reasonable to inquire in the first instance, because if the Qur'an does address that issue, then you have your answer.

The reality of dinosaurs - creatures from millions of years ago, which we didn't know anything about until their fossils were discovered, and we worked backwards from there to get a grasp on them - is a very different thing to the reality of things which we can physically see and touch today, so give the lad a break.

Regarding the wider implication of the Qur'an dictating a person's beliefs, well, that's kind of the whole point. We believe that the Qur'an is the literal word of God, and therefore try to live our lives by it. But equally, you're right that one still has to be rational and question things. There can be different interpretations of certain parts of the Qur'an, and some people deliberately misinterpret parts or take them out of context for political means or whatever and it absolutely can be dangerous then. As Einstein said, science without religion is lame, and religion without science is blind.

Hold your horses. Most of what you said there is reasonable, but that wasn't really what I was getting at. The OP seemed prepared to dismiss reality in favour of what he thought the Qu'ran said, without regard for the facts at his disposal. This seems to me to be a very unhealthy perspective.

confusedquark

Gumbi wrote: »

Hold your horses. Most of what you said there is reasonable, but that wasn't really what I was getting at. The OP seemed prepared to dismiss reality in favour of what he thought the Qu'ran said, without regard for the facts at his disposal. This seems to me to be a very unhealthy perspective.

Agreed, that's what I said in the last paragraph. One still has to be rational and question an interpretation of the Qur'an that you're getting if it's not adding up. I did say the OP was wrong to dismiss the notion of dinosaurs on the basis that there's no mention of them in the Qur'an. I also agree that people can be easily misled if they blindly follow an interpretation without questioning it. But ultimately (and this is where you and I will differ), I believe the Qur'an to be word of God and therefore fact, and if there were to be a discrepancy between what the Qur'an is saying and what science is saying, there must either be a problem with the translation/interpretation (usually the case) or the science (usually not). You just have to delve deeper until it makes sense.

dlofnep

confusedquark wrote: »

As Einstein said, science without religion is lame, and religion without science is blind.

Einstein did not believe in religion.

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."

-Albert Einstein, 1954

He also called all religions 'childish superstitions' in the same letter. So please, don't try make Einstein out as a supporter of religion or a religious person. His views on religion are absolutely clear.

taytothief

I've sometimes questioned the existence of Dinasours too. I've heard rumours of them but I just can't believe it myself. A sweet so sour that it could wipe out the human race? I mean, come on.

confusedquark

dlofnep wrote: »

Einstein did not believe in religion.

So I see, it's a great quote all the same. Apologies for implying he was pro-religion

hitchhiker42

I'm not sure why believing in dinosaurs has anything to do with religion? There is fossil evidence for all kinds of plant life and sea life existing before dinosaurs. People have no problem believing certain plants existed 1 million years ago. Extinction events cause some species to go away, and we know that certain fossilized plants no longer exist. Yet Nobody fights over prehistoric ferns and pine trees.

What boggles my mind is that when we find bones of some large creature, religious folks get uppity and say, "NO! That species is a myth!" Of all the species on this planet ever to go extinct, why to we decide that Velociraptors are suddenly a hot issue of debate and not all the fish, ferns and flies that came before them?

Christian or Muslim, it seems so silly to make a fuss over the theory of evolution. It's just a theory of biology. It occurs to me that there are many theories of Mathematics, but you never hear about religious fundamentalists arguing over the legitimacy of the Fourier Series. Christian groups never go on the rampage over Euler or Avogadro.

So unless Jesus & Muhammad jousted on the backs of T-Rexes in the Bible & Quoran, who cares? I fail to see why religious folks get so upset about specific academic topics and ignore all the others.

iba

This is very simple.

A reason that there is no mention of dinasaurs in the quran is that when the men who wrote/put together/compiled the quran in or around the 8/9th century who lived in or around Palestine/Jordan probably did not have any knowledge about dinasaurs.

Regards

hitchhiker42

iba wrote: »

This is very simple.

A reason that there is no mention of dinasaurs in the quran is that when the men who wrote/put together/compiled the quran in or around the 8/9th century who lived in or around Palestine/Jordan probably did not have any knowledge about dinasaurs.

Regards

Riiiiight.... I'm guessing you didn't catch the subtle sarcasm inherent in my question, but thanks for the polite reply.

Speaking of people living in the 8th century, they also probably didn't have any knowledge about distant galaxies, nuclear fission, the periodic table, electrical engineering or microbiology. However modern religious individuals have no problem believing in:
* the Hubble telescope
* Du Pont Corporation
* light bulbs
* the need for antibiotics & hand sanitizer.

So why people need to ask, "Should we believe in dinosaurs?" is beyond me, especially when they are willing to believe in so many other things discovered through the scientific method. Religious fundamentalists are willing to accept quantum field theory and the existence of subatomic particles, but somehow *dinosaurs* are a tough concept to fathom? Really?

That's what I don't get. Why dinosaurs? People are willing to ignore much more difficult scientific theories and concepts (you don't hear priests & Imams complaining on about String Theory) but they have this weird hangup with lizards. Go figure.

iba

hitchhiker42 wrote: »

Riiiiight.... I'm guessing you didn't catch the subtle sarcasm inherent in my question, but thanks for the polite reply.

Speaking of people living in the 8th century, they also probably didn't have any knowledge about distant galaxies, nuclear fission, the periodic table, electrical engineering or microbiology. However modern religious individuals have no problem believing in:
* the Hubble telescope
* Du Pont Corporation
* light bulbs
* the need for antibiotics & hand sanitizer.

So why people need to ask, "Should we believe in dinosaurs?" is beyond me, especially when they are willing to believe in so many other things discovered through the scientific method. Religious fundamentalists are willing to accept quantum field theory and the existence of subatomic particles, but somehow *dinosaurs* are a tough concept to fathom? Really?

That's what I don't get. Why dinosaurs? People are willing to ignore much more difficult scientific theories and concepts (you don't hear priests & Imams complaining on about String Theory) but they have this weird hangup with lizards. Go figure.

Hi Hitchiker,

I was not referring to your post whatsoever - if I was referring to your post I would have quoted it (like Im doing now). My post was a general post to the thread.

Regards

hivizman

hitchhiker42 wrote: »

That's what I don't get. Why dinosaurs? People are willing to ignore much more difficult scientific theories and concepts (you don't hear priests & Imams complaining on about String Theory) but they have this weird hangup with lizards. Go figure.

I suspect that it's not dinosaurs in themselves that cause some followers of revealed religions problems but what a belief in the conventional scientific understanding of dinosaurs might imply.

The first of these is the age of the earth and/or the universe - accepting the existence of dinosaurs as a life form some 70-200 million years ago makes it impossible to hold to a "young earth" view that the world was created around 6,000 years ago. Such a view tends to be associated with Christian fundamentalists and is less common among Muslims.

The second is evolution - belief in dinosaurs tends to go with belief in evolution and rejection of creationist accounts. As I note in an earlier post, Muslims tend to accept a "theistic" account of evolution, although many make an exception for humans, who are considered to have been directly created by God.