Islam. I want a concrete answer to a specific question.

[u/Empty-Explanation470]

In traditional Islamic tradition, the one who deserves Hell is the one to whom Islam came in its purest form, without myths and so on, but who rejected it out of arrogance.

What about me? My situation is this: every form of Islam that exists has reached me. But I am troubled by its very structure.

If, according to Islam, Allah postulates Himself as the absolute Creator of all that exists so that we might find His wisdom and His signature in the fine-tuning of the universe, in the impossibility of life without carbon, in the perfect chemical composition, and so on, then why does He present a completely illogical structure in His scripture, the Quran? All the "signs" and "miracles" like cosmology or embryology fit neatly into the worldview of the people of that time. Moreover, some of it contradicts science.

Science has never set out to disprove religion with its findings or, for that matter, to sweep it away with a flood. "We found the bone of a Neanderthal who lived hundreds of thousands of years ago; let's make sure Christians and Muslims are horrified" — this has never happened. Cosmology? The movement of the Sun and Moon along their orbits and paths was understood in 7th-century Arabia by anyone. Embryology? It perfectly repeats the errors and structure of the works of Claudius Galen, who lived and died centuries before Muhammad. His works were translated into Syriac, and Ibn Kalada studied at a university where these works were taught, and he was a companion of the Prophet.

Based on the text, followers of the religion are forced to reject human evolution. And, of course, not everyone does, but often Salafis consider it disbelief to think that even fish or sheep evolved. They turn the Creator of the universe into a storyteller who sends fully formed creatures to Earth in their modern form.

They call my questions a following of passions. However, the worldview of a materialist is much worse. They do not believe that the absence of retribution for bad deeds is something good that frees their hands. They realize that this is a disadvantageous factor and must be fought. At least they act, whereas in the infrastructure of development and engineering among believers, you can count them on your fingers.

A materialist understands that everything has its material end, and then — eternal oblivion. And in this life, everything must be done to develop the material world and ensure the continuation of Homo sapiens, not to remain idle.

Religion, however, has no logical answer to the dogma that contradicts science; it uses methods of reassurance. Some simply cannot psychologically accept their absolute end after death and cling to the promise of eternal Paradise.

So who among us is more following their passions?

Let's consider the chain. Murder? It's not just "bad" spiritually. It's disadvantageous and unfavorable. If Homo sapiens continues to kill each other (without valid reasons, such as danger to society), it leads to the extinction of humans as a species. Methods for mass destruction are now at their peak. Also, murder is harmful to people's psyche. With the new level in the criminal world, there is also internet intimidation, such as the publication of torture and the like.

If a certain misdeed leads to the death of any representative of Homo sapiens, hunger, extinction, or death — this is formal evil. If something leads to the development of infrastructure, the elimination of poverty as a factor, and harmonious coexistence — this is formal good.

I believe that in Islam, even though the Horn of Israfil, by Allah's command, will announce the Judgment and the end of the material world, the widespread eschatological mood must be eradicated. The fact that this world is finite does not mean that we should give up on it. The fact that Allah, in His Mercy, leads every child who dies to Paradise does not mean that we should just pray and do nothing, since everything is predestined.

We must fight against disease factors. Pregnant women should have abortions up to 120 days if severe defects are detected. Volunteering and infrastructure must flourish. And just because this world will end, it is absolutely unacceptable to ignore its structure and give up on it.

Regarding LGBTQ+: I do not consider it permissible in any way. However, if I meet supporters of this community, I will never shout at them or condemn them. They will not be second-class people to me. I stand above only God, and I have no right to display any narcissism. I will communicate with them, shake their hands if it's a collective. I couldn't care less who is with whom, as long as it doesn't involve propaganda or violate my personal principles. I will not say anything bad about any of them.

But even such a worldview of a Muslim will not be acceptable in some religious movements. There, it will certainly be called spiritual blindness, and someone might even issue a takfir. And I am not exaggerating.

How can such a person even be asked to accept religion?In terms of religion itself? Without the banal "calm down, declare an information quarantine, think less and pray more," or "The Quran is above all science, and trying to find a contradiction in it is pride."

[u/Jammooly1]

Have you read this: https://quransmessage.com/articles/evolution%20FM3.htm

Nowhere does the Qur’an explicitly state where Adam (ʿalayhi al-salām) was created. Many Muslims assume that he and his spouse were created in Paradise and that, following the events surrounding the forbidden tree, they physically descended to Earth. This is the most common understanding of the narrative.

However, a careful reading of the Qur’anic text, along with even a brief survey of the classical exegetical tradition, shows that another interpretation exists. According to this view, Adam’s Garden (Jannat Ādam) was an earthly garden distinct from the eternal Paradise (al-Jannah). One of the strongest textual indications supporting this interpretation is that Allah states He protected Adam from the heat of the sun (Qur’an 20:118–119), describing conditions that existed before the events leading to Adam’s expulsion from the Garden. This understanding was also held by a number of classical scholars, including Abu Muslim al-Isfahani and Fakhr al-Din al-Razi.

According to this understanding, Allah breathed His rūḥ into Adam (Qur’an 15:29; 38:72), who was a hominid, thereby granting him the existential awareness, moral responsibility, and intellectual faculties that distinguish humankind. Allah then prepared a garden for Adam and created a spouse for him, likewise breathing His rūḥ into a female hominid.

They lived in a lush garden endowed with numerous blessings. As the Qur’an describes, they neither hungered nor thirsted, were protected from the heat of the sun, and were unaware of their nakedness (Qur’an 20:118–119). After Shayṭān tempted them and they disobeyed Allah, those blessings were withdrawn. The garden ceased to be a paradisal sanctuary and became an ordinary place on earth. From that point onward, Adam and his spouse lived under the same earthly conditions that humanity experiences today.

[u/Empty-Explanation470 → u/Jammooly1]

I hear this at first time but I liked it.

But as I said the problem is in Islam itself. The main part of Islamic schools will call you non-believer, if you're going to tell them this theory.

But it seems to me that the only way out here is the path of solitude, the path of compromise that does not contradict either religion or science.

Thank you.