Question 53: Why do most scientists believe in the theory of evolution? If you say, “They defend this theory because they have no faith”, why do they deny a creator? How can a person, especially a scientist, deny deliberately?

Question 53: Why do most scientists believe in the theory of evolution? If you say, “They defend this theory because they have no faith”, why do they deny a creator? How can a person, especially a scientist, deny deliberately? Is it reasonable and logical?

Dear Brother / Sister,

Answer: Firstly, it is necessary to know what is being discussed. To put it more clearly, it is necessary to understand the discussion of evolution well.

What is evolution?

The word evolution is used for various words and phrases that have nuances like metamorphosis, differentiation, gradual development, change, progress and evolvement.

Materialistic evolutionists claim that all living beings come from one another in a chain coincidentally.

According to the determinations that could be done today, four basic molecules exist in the genetic structure of plants, animals and humans, that is, in all living beings. They are: Adenine, Guanine, Cytosine and Thymine. Carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, sulfur, phosphate and nitrogen atoms form the structures of those molecules.

It is the duty of science to show what elements living beings consist of in terms of genetic structure. It is not the duty of scientific knowledge to interpret what they indicate. This interpretation is related to cultural values like man’s belief, ideology, philosophical view and metaphysical thought.

The books that fill our bookcases are formed by the 26 letters of the alphabet. The view that books come from one another due to the fact that the letters are the same in all books is not scientific. Likewise, it is not a scientific approach to claim that all beings come from one another in chains acting upon the fact that they come from 114 elements.

As a necessity of their ideology, they use the similarities of the elements in the genetics of living beings as an argument to show that all beings come from one another in chains and coincidentally. Without leaving the scientific method, we clearly say that the similarities of the elements in living beings are the greatest evidence for the oneness and existence of their creator. We can write “fish”, “horse” or “man” with those 26 letters. Similarly, Allah creates any being He wishes at any time He wishes and however He wishes out of those 114 elements.

Thousands and even millions of plant and animal species including human beings on earth come from a single cell separately. Although there are small changes in the structures of human beings, a differentiation that changes the quality and characteristic of that living being does not occur. If the genetic structure of a living being changes or is changed substantially, that living being dies when it is an embryo. The world of science has not seen the genetic structure of a living being differentiate and produce a completely different living being so far. Even if a living being is produced from another living being, it will be created by Allah, too.

Those who advocate creation regard it as a necessity of science to search and examine all of the beings around closely and to include all of the different views regarding the issue. Nothing in the universe is stable. Everything, from atoms to galaxies, changes and differentiates all the time within the knowledge and will of Allah. Allah wants us to meditate on the beings in the universe, to reason and to think; He states that those who know and those who do not know are not equal.

To express it briefly, the existence of atoms and molecules in the structures of living beings by being transformed from one state into another, that is, by transmutation, takes place within the framework of certain laws of biology and physics. Therefore, the transmutation of elements is not a theory but a law of Allah that takes place through His knowledge, will and power.

In fact, nothing is stable in the universe. Everything, from atoms to galaxies, is moving and active all the time. The electrons around an atom revolve 50 thousand times per second. The molecules made up of atoms are also active. The solid molecules move slowly but the liquid molecules and the molecules in the air are faster. 

It is accepted that there are 100 billion galaxies in the universe. Some of these galaxies move away from one another at a speed close to the speed of light. All living beings are constantly changing. Man is made up of about one hundred trillion cells. Three thousand different reactions take place per second in a cell. A human being at the moment is not the same human being as the one a second ago in terms of matter. Many elements in his structure underwent change and metamorphosis. This change and metamorphosis and similar changes and metamorphoses are described as EVOLUTION. All of the changes and metamorphoses in this sense are a law, not a theory.

What makes evolution disputable?

What makes evolution disputable is to use it in the sense of the view that one species came from another species hence all living beings including human beings came from one another in chains coincidentally and as a work of nature.

What underlies the discussion of evolution?

Here, a creator is accepted or refused. Suppose that you are holding a pair of eyeglasses. You examine closely what it is made of and what it is used for. Everybody accepts that it is the work of a master. When the eye of a living being is taken into account instead of a pair of eyeglasses, it is also examined closely to show what it is used for and how it works.   

There is no problem between evolutionists and creationists up to this point. The dispute starts when the question ‘who is the master (maker) of the eye’ is asked. Those who advocate creation accept and claim that the eye is also the work of a master who has knowledge, will and power just like the master of the eyeglasses who has knowledge, will and power.  

Atheistic evolutionists accept that the pair of eyeglasses has a master but they state that the eye occurred by chance and that it did not have a master; they also put forward that such a claim is a scientific approach. In short, they exclude Allah.

Difference of viewing the universe between creationists and evolutionists

One of the crucial points between materialistic evolutionists and creationists is that evolutionists view the world based on causes and on behalf of nature; they attribute everything to causes.   

Creationists view the universe on behalf of Allah. When the universe is viewed on behalf of Allah, all of the information obtained in that field becomes a means of knowing Allah. Islam states that the more man makes progress in science, that is, the more he obtains information about living beings, the more he will know about the wisdom and domination of Allah’s administration in the universe.

If we go back to the reason why scientists generally oppose religion in the question above, we see the following:

Materialistic philosophy, which became dominant thanks to the French Revolution in the nineteenth century, maintained a stance against the religion of Christianity; after that, religious thought was shown as opposite or hostile to all kinds of scientific development. After that time, the foundations of all political, sociological and scientific studies were based on atheism.

Those who did not know Islam equated Islam with Christianity. The stance against Christianity was perceived as stance against Islam. 

However, Islam does not conflict with science because the religion of Islam sees the whole universe as a book - a book that is the work of Allah’s attribute of power and a book written by elements, that is, the book of the universe.

Most of the scientists do not accept evolution in the sense of one species coming from another species in chains coincidentally.

Most of the scientists do not accept the view of evolution in the sense of living beings coming from one another gradually and coincidentally. Besides, the dispute between creationists and evolutionists is due to this type of understanding of evolution. What is more, such a view of evolution, which is advocated by materialistic philosophers and atheistic biologists, is not scientific knowledge but a philosophical view and interpretation based on metaphysics. Therefore, the approach that such a philosophical view is accepted by all scientists is a completely ideological attitude. It has nothing to do with the truth.

Questions on Islam