A MUSLIM’S GUIDE TO NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND ATHEISM

‫الحمد هلل رب العاملين والصالة والسالم على أشرف‬

.‫ألانبياء واملرسلين وعلى آله وصحبه أجمعين‬

1. Introduction
The claim that best fits the available evidence—according to the
standards of scientific inquiry--is that biological life is designed and
created through knowledge (ʿilm), will (irādah), power (qudrah) and
wisdom (ḥikmah).
This is an empirical conclusion and can be formulated—from an
information, communications and engineering perspective—as a
scientific hypothesis which is not falsifiable except by abandoning
common sense and reason. Falsifiability tests can be devised and
constructed for this claim.23 Design with intent in biological life is
presented as a scientific hypothesis in this book along with
falsifiability tests.
At the same time, the claim that the scientific method of inquiry
is the only way to ascertain truths and facts cannot be proven by the
scientific method itself and is therefore false. We shall explore this
further in chapters relating to naturalism and the scientific method.
Thus, we can also claim—from the angle of innate disposition,
common sense, basic reason and applied human intelligence in
industry and technology—that biological life is designed and created
through knowledge (ʿilm), will (irādah), power (qudrah) and wisdom
(ḥikmah) without requiring any application of the scientific method.
The acquisition of sound, factual knowledge is not dependent solely

23
In scientific inquiry, falsifiability tests increase the scientific status of
a hypothesis. In the Qurʾān, tests of falsifiability are provided for non-
believers: If there is doubt about the Qurʾān’s divine origin, then produce a
chapter like it to prove it is the work of a human (2:23). There is a challenge
to create a simple form of biological life, a fly (22:73). Nimrod, the arrogant
tyrant, is requested to bring the sun from the west (2:258) to prove his
claim and to falsify Ibrāhīm’s () that the sun’s course has been
designated for it by its creator.

@abuiyaad | aboutatheism.net | 20
 A MUSLIM’S GUIDE TO NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND ATHEISM

on the scientific method. Limitations in the truth-reaching capacity

of the scientific method are discussed later in this work. That is not
to deny that it is an extremely useful and beneficial tool of inquiry to
gain knowledge and understanding of phenomena .
A universal digital information, communication and engineering
system drives biological life and manifests as a hardware-operating
system platform within which a database of prescriptive information
in the form of code is edited in real-time to generate software which
can create, run and control more software which in turn creates and
controls machinery allowing self-repair, self-regulation and self-
replication.24 Upon this architecture, biological life is designed with
an in-built capacity for adaptation and change within defined limits
in response to external stimuli. Organisms can share or acquire
software code through which novelty can be introduced—not
randomly as per the creed of the naturalists—but within a pre-
configured design architecture that accommodates and accounts for
all such variations. Physiologically similar organisms can reproduce
and introduce variety if their coded instruction sets are similar and
compatible enough to allow fertile offspring.25
The ability to manipulate genetic code within a laboratory setting
and introduce change and novelty with intent and by design is also
empirical evidence that life is designed. This is no different to
improving software through the use of pre-existing code templates,
modules and plugins. “Evolution” within this conceptual
framework—with understanding of computational and engineering

24
This has been the emerging understanding of cellular, biological life
and the relevant research in this regard is summarised later in this work.
25
For example dogs and wolves are able to interbreed and produce
viable, fertile offspring and it can be said that such physiologically similar
variations have a “common ancestor”. However, this does not allow the
generalisation that all species have a universal common ancestor within the
framework of neo-Darwinian evolution, since the proposed mechanism for
the emergence of variation, involvinng random mutations, has been
empirically disproven, and further, this claim employs fallacious reasoning,
through the use of hasty generalisation. This issue—and how evolutionists
construct their arguments—is discussed in more detailed later in the book.

@abuiyaad | aboutatheism.net | 21
 A MUSLIM’S GUIDE TO NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND ATHEISM

processes within the cell such as transposition and epigenetics—can

accommodate all verifiable observations, whether in nature or
within a laboratory setting. This is on the basis of belief in al-qaḍā
wal-qadar (divine determination and precision in all affairs) and the
fact that the creator has put inherent properties, strengths and
qualities in things, and that the creation operates through a complex
interconnected system of causes and effects (al-asbāb wal-
musabbabāt) which are a manifestation of immense, unrivalled
creative power.
The famous Muslim scholar Ibn al-Qayyim (d. 1350) said:
“The universe is tied together through causes (al-asbāb), forces
(al-quwā) and efficient and purposeful causes (al-ʿilal al-fāʿiliyyah wal-
ghāʾiyyah).”26
He also said:
“If we were to follow up what affords the affirmation of causes
(ways and means) from the Quʾān and the Sunnah, it would be
(found) in more than ten thousand places and we do not say that out
of exaggeration, but in actual reality. But sufficient is the witness of
sensory perception, reason and innate disposition (to establish it).
For this reason it was said by one from the people of knowledge, ‘A
people spoke about rejection of the causes (ways and means) and
thus caused the possessors of intelligence to laugh at their
intellects’.”27
As such, there is no conflict between reason and revelation
because revelation accommodates all empirically verified factual
observations and cause-effect relationships.28 As such, variation in

26
Madārij al-Sālkīn (1/256).
27
Shifāʾ al-ʿAlīl (p. 189).
28
This opposes the view of the Ashʿarites who oppose both reason and
revelation in denying that created entities have been endued with inherent
qualities, strengths and powers through which efficient causality arises
(cause-effect systems). For details of their views refer to, by way of
example: Binyamin Abrahamov. Al-Ghazālī's Theory of Causality. Studia
Islamica. No. 67 (1988), pp. 75-98; Ilai Alon. Al-Ghazālī on Causality. Journal of
the American Oriental Society 100 (4):397 (1980); Griffel, Frank (2010), Al-

@abuiyaad | aboutatheism.net | 22
 A MUSLIM’S GUIDE TO NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND ATHEISM

the creation—and empirically verified cause-effect mechanisms for

that variation—do not pose any problems. There is no conflict.
Thus, “variation” is real and true. Denying it is denying sensory
perception. It arises because it is pre-programmed and includes in-
built adaptive mechanisms that anticipate environmental changes
and challenges. There are strict limits to variation that can never be
crossed. This is confirmed by empirical evidence through laboratory
testing29 and also in the practice of “artificial selection” in which
plants and animals are interbred to enhance certain desirable traits
above others. However, when pushed to extremes, the hybrid line
tends to terminate because the enhancement of one quality usually
comes at the expense of others. Thus, if a barrier is reached with
artificial selection, guided with intent, knowledge and purpose, it is
far-fetched to claim that blind, purposeless “natural selection” can
trascend this barrier to introduce novel forms and features and turn
the organism into a physiologically different species through
random mutations. This is the imaginary part of [neo-Darwinian]
evolution which is deduced from prior philosophical materialist
convictions and is not empirically proven through the scientific
method as will be demonstrated in this work inshāʾAllāh.
The imaginary part of “evolution” lies in the religious,
metaphysical, philosophical non-empirical speculative claim that
biological life with all its diversity arose through blind, undirected
processes involving chance (random events) and necessity (physico-
chemical laws) with random mutation being the driver of biological
change and speciation. These ideas—though more sophisticated in
nature—are not new. They have been stated before in cruder, less
sophisticated terms, by the primitives. Naturalists of old claimed

Ghazali’s Philosophical Theology, Oxford University Press. Al-Ghazali’s view

represents the standard Ashʿarite position on this subject. Refutation of this
view is apparent in the Qurʾān, the Prophetic traditions and the writings of
well-known Salafī scholars such as Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim in
their numerous works.
29
Such as Drosophila fruit fly experiments which for 80 years have not
produced any novel features or newe species.

@abuiyaad | aboutatheism.net | 23
 A MUSLIM’S GUIDE TO NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND ATHEISM

that everything regenerates in an eternal cyclical process and only

the passing of time causes life and death.
The Muslim Qurʾānic exegete Ibn Kathīr (d. 1373) said: “[This] is
said by the atheist philosophers [who believe in] continuous
regeneration [of life] in rejection of a Maker and who believe that
everything returns back to its original state after [every] 3,600 years.
They claim this has recurred for eternity. Thus, they showed
arrogation towards rationality and rejected revealed text, and it is
why they said:
َ ‫َو َما ُي ْهل ُك َنا إ َّل‬
‫الد ْه ُر‬ ِ ِ
‘Nothing destroys us but time.’ (45:24).
Allāh the Exalted said:
ُ َ ْ ََٰ َ
‫َو َما ل ُهم ِبذ ِل َك ِم ْن ِعلم ِإ ْن ُه ْم ِإّل َيظ ُّنو َن‬
‘They have no knowledge of that, they merely speculate.’ (45:24).
Meaning, that they presume and imagine.”30
The theory of Charles Darwin regarding “The origin of species by
means of natural selection and the preservation of favoured races in the
struggle for life”31—as it was later interpreted and presented—is a

30
Tafsīr al-Quʾān al-ʿAẓīm, explanation of al-Jāthiyah (45:24).
31
Both Charles Darwin (d. 1882) and Alfred Russel Wallace (d. 1913) came
up with similar theories independently. Wallace revealed his idea to Darwin
in a 1858 letter and also wrote an essay titled “On the tendency of varieties to
depart indefinitely from the original type”. Seeing that he might be outdone in
publishing, Darwin quickly got writing and released On the Origin of Species
By Means of Natural Selection a year later in November 1859. Both of these
men had read Thomas Malthus’s Essay on the Principle of Population and were
influenced in the same way, leading them to develop similar ideas. Darwin’s
theory was influenced by Malthus’s thesis: populations grow exponentially
(geometrically) whereas the food supply grows linearly (arithmetically). As
such, there will be a struggle for survival and favoured species and races
will survive whilst others will be eliminated. Darwin extrapolated from this
the notion that favourable variations that arise in species as a result of
struggle would be preserved and could lead to the formation of new species.
Thus, the mathematics of economic struggle and race differences (favoured
traits) were combined to produce a concept that allowed for formation of
new species. This claim was extrapolated from the small differences which

@abuiyaad | aboutatheism.net | 24
 A MUSLIM’S GUIDE TO NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND ATHEISM

sophisticated rehash of the same idea. There is nothing original in

this belief. However, in its particular formulation, it provided the
basis for a more complicated, deceptive version of the religious
belief of previous naturalists.
In this work, when spoken of critically, evolution is defined as:
The theory that all biological species are descended from a universal
common ancestor through random mutations of DNA and natural selection.
Or—alternatively worded for accuracy—: The theory that biological
species which are not physiologically similar and are unable to interbreed to
provide viable fertile offspring descended from common ancestry through
random mutations of DNA and natural selection.
This definition excludes all empirically verified mechanisms of
variation such as transposition, horizontal gene transfer, epigenetic
processes—which as this work will show—are pre-programmed and
in-built as part of a vast and complex design architecture which
gives powerful evidence that knowledge, will, intent, purpose,
design and wisdom are behind biological life and its diversity.

are observed between parents and offspring or adaptive changes in animals

in response new environments, and likewise from artificial breeding
practices. However, Wallace later changed his mind and accepted
intelligent design. In 1910, Wallace wrote the book, “The World of Life: A
Manifestation of Creative Power, Directive Mind and Ultimate Purpose”. Darwin
endowed ‘nature’ with the power of selection, the all-pervasive powerful
force which can be invoked as an all-explanatory mechanism in every
situation and scenario. It has the power to explain everything whilst
proving nothing. Thus, miraculously, for example, the eye or other features
are claimed to have been created by “natural selection” at least forty
separate times in different geographical locations by “natural selection”. To
remove the miraculous element in this wondrous feat of the blind,
undirected random process, new terms are crafted to encrypt the meaning:
convergent evolution. These cryptic terms conceal the underlying religious
system which involves faith in unobserved miraculous phenomena. Eye-
witness accounts of historical events and phenomena by tens, hundreds or
thousands, passed on through successive oral transmission are greater in
reliability than the conjectures and wild speculations about what has not
been seen or experienced at all. Thus, there is greater justification for
believing in the miracles of the Prophets, than believing in the miracles
invoked by the naturalists and atheists.

@abuiyaad | aboutatheism.net | 25
 A MUSLIM’S GUIDE TO NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND ATHEISM

This reframed naturalist religion has allowed materialists and

atheists, in their own words, to become intellectually fulfilled. It is—as
shall become clear inshāʾAllāh—an unverifiable hypothesis and
nothing more than a materialist doctrine. Let us elaborate on how
they attained this intellectual fulfilment.
Speaking about the speculative theologians (ahl al-kalām) amongst
the Muslims, and the philosophers and naturalists and their views on
causes, effects and the inherent properties of things, the renowned
Muslim Scholar Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 1328) said:
“For they (the philosophers and naturalists) observe some of the
(natural causes) just as they observe the inherent properties and
powers (forces) which Allāh created within essences (ajsām) and just
as they observe the effects of the sun and moon upon this world, but
alongside this, they assign the events arising (thereby) to a cause
amongst His causes, such as ascribing newly-emerging entities to
‘nature’. But ‘nature’ is simply an attribute (that is) established with
the entity.32 Thus, the one who made ‘nature’ to be that which brings
about a human in the womb of his mother and whatever he
possesses of the various limbs and the strengths and benefits
endowed upon (these limbs), then his saying is more apparently
corrupt than those sayings in which the newly-emerging entities are
assigned to an eternal (static) will without affirmation of a cause or a
wisdom (therein), or assigning newly-emerging entities to the power
of a willing, powerful agent, irrespective of whether that power (has
been exercised in) eternity or is exercised (through recurring will).
For both of these sayings are better than assigning that to ‘nature’
which is simply an attribute in an entity amongst the entities, which
has no wish or will.”33
Naturalists, atheists and evolutionists ascribe “creative genius” to
nature in the absence of will, choice, intent. And this is really the
crux of the entire issue.

32
It is important to grasp this point. Refer to the citation from the
Islāmic scholar Ibn al-Qayyim a little later regarding the naturalist who
believes nature is the creator.
33
Refer to Kitāb al-Ṣafadiyyah, Aḍwāʾ al-Salaf, 1423H, p. 169 onwards.

@abuiyaad | aboutatheism.net | 26
 A MUSLIM’S GUIDE TO NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND ATHEISM

The actual point of contention, when we peel off all the layers of
deception, cryptic terminology and doublespeak in their statements
and writings is whether creation (contrivance, design, end-goal,
objective-orientation) comes via choice with intent34—or to put it
another way, through the attributes of knowledge (ʿilm), will
(mashīʿah), power (qudrah) and wisdom (ḥikmah)—or in their absence.
Since choice with intent is rejected then, naturally, there only
remains: chance (random events) and necessity (physical law) which
work together blind and undirected and given enough time, can lead
to scenarios in which creative processes can be unleashed.
Here is the secret of the naturalists and atheists: They have
simply taken the attributes which belong to a creator—knowledge,
will, power, wisdom—ascribed them to nature covertly, introduced
the concept of randomness so as to conceal evident purposes, goals
and wisdoms (ḥikam), and then masked everything through the use
of imaginitive, creative, cryptic, complicated terminology. In their
scientific investigations, theory-formulations and writings, they are
often inescapably forced to speak of nature as having purpose, power,
genius and so on on the one hand, whilst consciously denying it on
the other. Their contradiction is plain to see for all people of sound
mind. When evaluated according to the strict standards of empirical
science the theory of evolution [descent with modification arising
through purely natural means without being engineered or caused
by a creator represented by choice with intent, or the attributes of
knowledge, will and power] is quickly exposed as a philosophical
doctrine, and is disqualified as a scientific theory because of the
vagueness and elasticity of definitions. It is protected ferociously by
devoted, religious believers who have invested their emotions into it
as relief from cosmic authority syndrome.35

34
The phrase “choice with intent” represents selection, the act of
choosing which is not without intent. In other words that which involves
agency. It contrasts with events that are said to be “chosen” through purely
physico-chemical dynamics in nature where no intent is present.
35
An emotional dislike and aversion of the notion that there should be
an authority over the universe at all.

@abuiyaad | aboutatheism.net | 27
 A MUSLIM’S GUIDE TO NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND ATHEISM

In his book Origin of the Species, Charles Darwin gives the example
of artificial selection in which desired traits are accumulated within
species through careful selection of breeding stock. Breeders could
cultivate certain traits and found that offspring of the selected stock
had those particular traits enhanced. This was “evolution”. Darwin
extrapolated natural selection from this and spoke of nature as if it
was purposeful, like artificial breeding. He spoke of natural selection
it as if it was an all-powerful force that can account for everything.
Basically, whatever man can do through knowledge, choice and
intent, nature can also do. The difference was that though man is
able to select with a rational mind with end-objectives in mind,
nature, blind and purposeless, is superior.
Darwin therefore laid the ground for atheists to pursue their goal
of intellectual fulfillment. Richard Dawkins stated, “Although atheism
might have been logically tenable before Darwin, Darwin made it
possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.”36 Dawkins follows
Darwin in ascribing such qualities to nature.37 He mentions “the
power of natural selection”38, of its mimicking “conscious design”,
giving the illusion of “design and planning”, serving as a blind “
watchmaker” which produces animals who get the illusion that they
have been “brilliantly designed for a purpose”. He speaks of
“intricate architecture and precision-engineering”.39
What the naturalists and atheists have done is summarised by Ibn
al-Qayyim succintly:

“Stripping what is made [contrived, designed, originated, manufactured]

from having a maker and creator.”40

36
The Blind Watchmaker. New York:Norton 1987. p. 6.
37
The Blind Watchmaker, cover, p. 5 and The Necessity of Darwinism, New
Scientist: 94, 4/15/82, p130.
38
The Blind Watchmaker. New York:Norton 1987. pp. 94.
39
The Blind Watchmaker. New York:Norton 1987. pp. 1-3.
40
Anwāʿ al-Shirk. Maktabah Ṭabariyyah. 1992. p. 14.

@abuiyaad | aboutatheism.net | 28
 A MUSLIM’S GUIDE TO NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND ATHEISM

They have stripped the creator of His attributes and conferred

them upon nature. Then they use semantic devices to covertly
ascribe the same attributes to nature: natural selection, self-ordering,
self-organization, emergence, complexity at the edge of chaos, dissipative
structure formation and so on. When discussing these concepts, it is
extremely difficult for them to avoid the use of language which
implies end-objectives, goal-orientation, purposefulness and
qualities which can only be found with conscious, rational beings.
Thus, the use of cryptic terminology and language.
Often, they make huge slips. In a 2014 lecture titled “The Origins
of Life: From Geochemistry to Biochemistry”41 Nita Sahei, professor
at the University of Akron and origin-of-life researcher spoke of the
types of molecules that would have to be coordinated to form life in
the lab, including, “four nucleotides, twenty amino-acids, there
could be a few lipids that could involve... several clays42 and other
minerals.” Next, she speaks of the enormous difficulty: “So its a
combinatorial nightmare” and then she slips up: “And we need to
use intelligent...” Realising what she has just said, she quickly
corrects herself, “Not intelligent design—we need to use our ... our
knowledge...” Seeing she is stuck, a professor in the audience helps
her out by saying, “careful selection”. Back to her senses, she now
rephrases, “We need to carefully select which nucleotides to start
with, which amino acids and minerals based on our knowledge of
the structure and reactivity of these components.” After completing
this sentence, she remains silent for a moment, a bewildered look on
her face for a split second, as her mind contemplates the factual
reality that has just pounded her intellect and her conscience. Then

41
Refer to: https://youtu.be/CeVk9yC0_vk at 48m:30s. The lecture was
at the Institute for the Science of Origins at Case Western Reserve
University. See also Tom Bethell, Darwin’s House of Cards, 2017: p. 152 and
Researcher Almost Admits, then Quickly Retracts, that 'Intelligent Design' Is Needed
to Explore Origin of Life at http://www.evolutionnews.org.
42
Note the reference to clay. In the Qurʾān, Allāh describes the creation
of man through extracts and types of clay, see (23:12), (55:14), (15:26), (32:7).

@abuiyaad | aboutatheism.net | 29
 A MUSLIM’S GUIDE TO NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND ATHEISM

she says, “And we will also screen, we still have a large number of
interactions to screen.”
What we see here is stark admission—through a slip of the
tongue—of the reality alluded to by Ibn al-Qayyim earlier: stripping
the creation of the wilful acts of creation that gave rise to it thereby
negating the necessity of a creator’s existence. This researcher, and
countless others, know that without knowledge, intelligent design,
careful selection, screening for specific interactions and choosing with an
end-goal in mind, they cannot produce anything which even remotely
resembles biological life.
Very careful attention should be given to Nita Sahei’s use of the
phrase “careful selection”—because it gives away the game from the
outset. Whenever “selection” is used in any of their statements and
writings, it has “knowledge, will, intent, direction, purpose” conceptually
embedded within it.
This exposes the arrogation in intellect upon which atheists have
built their intellectually fulfilling religion. It is a religion they have
crafted to provide themselves with psychological and emotional
relief from cosmic authority syndrome, especially when their claims
blatantly clash with rationality and the scientific experiments
performed front of their eyes and noses.
At the Royal Society November 2016 conference discussing “New
Trends In Evolutionary Biology: Biological, Philosophical And Social Science
Perspectives”, one of the professors, Samir Okasha, presented a
lecture on the metaphor of agency. The following is the abstract, which
should be read carefully in light of what has preceded (emphasis
added):
Evolution and the metaphor of agency
Professor Samir Okasha, University of Bristol, UK
It is striking that evolutionary biology often uses the language of
intentional psychology to describe the behaviour of evolved
organisms, their genes, and the process of natural selection that led
to their evolution. Thus a cuckoo chick ‘deceives’ its host; a worker
ant ‘prefers’ to tend the queen’s eggs to those of other workers; a
swallow ‘realises’ that winter is approaching and ‘wants’ to escape it;
an imprinted gene ‘knows’ whether it was inherited paternally or

@abuiyaad | aboutatheism.net | 30
 A MUSLIM’S GUIDE TO NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND ATHEISM

maternally; and natural selection ‘chooses’ some phenotypes over

others.
This intentional idiom is a symptom of a broader way of thinking
about and modelling evolution, which I call ‘agential’. This involves
treating evolved entities, paradigmatically individual organisms, as
if they were agents trying to achieve a goal, namely maximisation of
reproductive fitness (or some proxy). The use of rational choice
models, originally intended to apply to deliberate human action, in
an evolutionary context, is one symptom of agential thinking.43
I offer a cautious defence of agential thinking in evolutionary
biology. I argue that this mode of thinking does genuine intellectual
work, and is not ‘idle metaphor’. The key point is that attributions of
agency presuppose a ‘unity of purpose’.
In his lecture given to the Society, Okasha discusses three things:
a) the use of the “intentional” idiom in evolutionary biology,
b) the “agential views” of evolution and
c) the use of “concepts from the view of human rationality” in
evolutionary biology.
Okasha notes: “It’s a familiar point that the language of
intentional psychology is widely used within evolutionary biology”
and he explains “intentional psychology” in terms of when humans
speak of “beliefs, desires, purposes and goals”. Sometimes this is
applied “to organisms, genes, groups, even to the evolutionary
process itself.” He states: “And we find assertions like ‘natural
selection chooses phenotypes’, ‘tries to solve design problems’ and so on.”
Okasha speaks of ways used to “inject agency” into evolutionary
biology. In type one, “the agent with the goal is Mother Nature, a
personification of natural selection, the notion of Darwin, also
defended at length by the philosopher Daniel Dennet”.44 In type two,
“the agent with a goal is an actual evolved entity in the here and
now. That might be a gene, more usually an organism...”. Okasha
describes type one as “dubious” and does not reccommend that
evolutionary biologists “talk that way”—for obvious reasons—and

43
Refer to: https://royalsociety.org/science-events-and-lectures/2016/
11/evolutionary-biology/.
44
An American philosopher and neo-Darwinian fundamentalist.

@abuiyaad | aboutatheism.net | 31
 A MUSLIM’S GUIDE TO NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND ATHEISM

states that type two “can be good.” About type one, which is
“personification of natural selection and the use of psychological
descriptors” he says, “we find this employed by Darwin, Darwin
wrote that ‘natural selection is daily and hourly scrutinizing every
variation, rejecting that which is bad, preserving all that is good,
working insensibly for the improvement of each organic being’.
Darwin was aware of this metaphorical usage and said its difficult to
avoid personifying nature.” There is more in the lecture, but this
amount suffices for our purpose.
The reader will now have been sufficiently primed about the
precise nature of the naturalist scam to be unravelled in the rest of
this book inshāʾAllāh.
The above citation shows that it is impossible to speak of creation
except with the language of design, purpose, intent and wisdom.
This is because science itself is a design payoff, and the entire
scientific enterprise finds its justification on the basis that there is
order, regularity, design and purpose in what is being studied. This is
neurally embedded in the subconscious mind and is inevitably and
unsecapably expressed in language. Okasha makes the interesting
remark that “attributions of agency presuppose a ‘unity of purpose’.”
Meaning, when agency is attributed to the evolutionary process, a
grand purpose has been presupposed. What is going here is that
elements of the fiṭrah (innate disposition) that have remained intact
are coming through and being expressed in the form of truths, save
that the utterer can often remain blind to the implied reality of what
is being said, because of the corruption that has altered the fiṭrah on
account of speculations, conjections and whims.
Yes, there is a grand unified purpose, and it is not in vain:
َ َ ُ َ ُ َ َ ََ
‫أف َح ِس ْب ُت ْم أ َن َما َخل ْق َناك ْم َع َبثا َوأ َنك ْم ِإل ْي َنا ّل ُت ْر َج ُعو َن‬
“Did you think that We had created you in play (without any
purpose), and that you would not be brought back to Us?” (23:115).
There is a maker who created life with knowledge, precision and
wisdom. And Ibn al-Qayyim said of it: “He combines the objectives of
His actions and the wisdom of His creation and command into a

@abuiyaad | aboutatheism.net | 32
 A MUSLIM’S GUIDE TO NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND ATHEISM

single objective, the ultimate objective, which is to establish the true

divinity, with all [alleged] divinities besides it being futile and
impossible.”45 Thus, the divinities that the Naturalists ascribe to
“nature”— whether the primitives who went on to worship nature
or the arrogant, sophisticated moderns of our time who cannot
escape ascribing divine attributes to nature and resort to sophistry
and cryptology as a means of concealing it—are all false divinities.
Allāh the Exalted said:
ُ ََْ َ ُ َ َ َ َ ‫َق‬
‫ال َرُّب َنا ال ِذي أ ْعط َٰى ك َل ش ْيء خلق ُه ث َم َه َد َٰى‬
“He (Moses) said, ‘Our Lord is He who gave each thing its form
and then guided [as to its pursuits and modes of activity]’.” (20:50).
The Qurʾānic exegetes explain that the guidance referred to here is
with respect to the degree of awareness [of meaning] and reason
required and suited for each form of biological life to pursue its
beneficial interests.46 Each creature is “guided to its form of mating,
reproduction, food, drink and abode.”47 Each is programmed with its
own instinct and behaviour.
ُ ُ َ َ ُ َ َ َ َ ُ َ َ َ َ َْ ْ َ َ ََ
‫اح ْي ِه ِإّل أ َمم أ ْمثالكم‬ ‫ض وّل طا ِئر ي ِطير ِبجن‬
ِ ‫وما ِمن دابة ِفي ألار‬
“And there is no creature on [or within] the earth or bird that
flies with its wings except [that they are] communities like you.”
(6:38).
َ ْ َ َ ُ ََ َ
‫َوالل ُه خل َق ك َل َد َابة ِمن َماء ف ِم ْن ُهم َمن َي ْم ِش ي َعل َٰى َبط ِن ِه َو ِم ْن ُهم َمن َي ْم ِش ي َعل َٰى‬
َ َ ُ َ َ َ َ ُْ َ َ َ
‫ِر ْجل ْي ِن َو ِم ْن ُهم َمن َي ْم ِش ي َعل َٰى أ ْرَبع َيخل ُق الل ُه َما َيش ُاء ِإ َن الل َه َعل َٰى ك ِل ش ْيء ق ِدير‬
“Allāh has created every [living] creature from water. And of
them are those that move on their bellies, and of them are those that
walk on two legs, and of them are those that walk on four. Allāh
creates what He wills. Indeed, Allāh is over all things competent.”
(24:45).
ُ ْ
‫َو ِفي َخل ِقك ْم َو َما َي ُب ُّث ِمن َد َابة َآيات ِل َق ْوم ُيو ِق ُنو َن‬

45
Shifāʾ al-ʿAlīl. Beirut: Dār Kuutb al-ʿIlmiyyah. 2nd edition. p. 385.
46
Refer to the explanations of al-Ṭabarī, al-Saʿdī, al-Baghawī.
47
As related by al-Ṭabarī in his tafsīr from Ibn ʿAbbās.

@abuiyaad | aboutatheism.net | 33
 A MUSLIM’S GUIDE TO NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND ATHEISM

“And in your creation, and what He scattered (through the earth)

of moving (living) creatures are signs for people who have Faith with
certainty.” (45:4).
Humans have been placed above all creatures and given the best
of form, language and reason. All creatures have communities. They
have their own forms of communication. And they have degrees of
“awareness” and “reason” suited to their form and function.
The naturalist scam is exposed in the simplest of ways in the
Qurʾān with the power of stupefying reason:
َ ‫َأ َف َمن َي ْخ ُل ُق َك َمن َّل َي ْخ ُل ُق َأ َف َال َت َذ َك ُر‬
‫ون‬
“Is one who creates like one who does not create? So will you not
be reminded?” (16:17). Are these arrogant disbelievers and their
worshipped deities, who are unable to create even a fly through
knowledge, intelligent design, careful selection, screening and choosing with
an obvious end-goal in mind—like the one who creates in reality and in
truth?
And another truth:
َ ْ ُ َ ََ َ ََ
‫أّل َي ْعل ُم َم ْن خل َق َو ُه َو الل ِطيف الخ ِب ُير‬
“Should not He Who has created know? And He is the Subtle, the
Acquainted. ” (67:14). Knowledge and creation are binding as Nita
Sahei and other origin-of-life researchers know full well. A challenge
is thrown:
ُْ َ َ َ َ َ َ َ ُ َ ُ َ ْ َ َ َ َ ُ ُ َ َ ُّ َ َ
‫ين ت ْد ُعون ِمن ُدو ِن الل ِه لن َيخل ُقوا‬‫يا أيها الناس ض ِرب مثل فاست ِمعوا له ِإن ال ِذ‬
َ ْ ‫ُذ َبابا َو َلو‬
‫اج َت َم ُعوا ل ُه‬ ِ
“O people, an example is presented, so listen to it. Indeed, those
you invoke besides Allāh will never create [as much as] a fly, even if
they gathered together for that purpose.” (22:73). With all the
advances in genetics and biotechnology and millions of sharp minds,
they are unable.
The arrogant, disputive nature of man is exposed:
َ َ َ ْ ََ َ ُ َ ْ ََ ْ َََ
‫ان أ َنا خل ْق َن ُاه ِمن ُّنط َفة ف ِإذا ُه َو خ ِصيم ُّم ِبين‬ ‫أولم ير ِْلانس‬

@abuiyaad | aboutatheism.net | 34
 A MUSLIM’S GUIDE TO NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND ATHEISM

“Does not man see that we have created him from semen-drops
(nuṭfah). Yet behold! He (stands forth) as an open disputant.” (36:77)
Created from a mere sperm-drop, of lowly, humble origins,
expelled from one private part, and pushed at birth from another,
this man becomes an open disputant, is unjustifiabley arrogant and
ungrateful.
Returning back to the nature of the scam:
The naturalist atheist religious statement of creed, “creation in the
absence of choice with intent” or “nature as an able, knowing, willing,
purposeful creator” is buried, concealed and camouflaged with
multiple layers of cryptic terminology and doublespeak within a
philosophically asserted materialist paradigm of scientific enquiry.48
Darwinism—and any subsequent rendition thereof including the
modern synthesis, the extended synthesis, “the third way” and
whatever else might come in the future—has been deductively
argued from prior philosophical and theoretical convictions in
naturalism and materialism and are not argued on the merits of
genuine, unbiased, neutral scientific inquiry and the strict standards
of its methods alone.
Since rejection of choice with intent necessitates explanation
through blind, random, undirected processes, the only alternative is
to assert gradual accumulation of systematic, sequential changes in
primitive life forms leading to complex life forms. You have no other
choice. This belief would have to appear at some point in history
upon the tongue or by the pen of some character. It was just a matter
of time before this was articulated. Darwin was that character. And
naturalists and atheists finally found a means for intellectually
fulfilling self-delusion.
To grasp its reality, this scenario will make it clear:
Some crash survivors are stranded on an island. They find an
open beach and write “save our souls” in the sand by laying down

48
Rarely, some atheists make frank admissions of the underlying
psychology at work. From them is Richard Lewontin, an evolutionary
biologist, who is cited later in this work.

@abuiyaad | aboutatheism.net | 35
 A MUSLIM’S GUIDE TO NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND ATHEISM

branches, leaves and coconuts. An airplane goes past and notices the
message. They try to figure out how it could have got there. They
know that speculating that a sudden whirlwind led to the immediate
chance and spontaneous creation of the message would be too far
fetched and statistically impossible. So instead, they assert that the
combined forces of the wind, sea and random events, led, over time,
to the gradual appearance of the message. They then devise maths
equations and statistical analyses to see if such an outcome is
feasible. Their computer software—through the input of ocean
waves, wind speed and direction, coconut shape and size, branch and
leaf dynamics—affirms that their predetermined end goal—a
meaningful message with a call to action—is feasible. The ability of
“natural selection” to create information and give the illusion of
design by acting upon variations in sand, coconuts, branches and
leaves has now been confirmed and “evolution” is a fact. Explanation
through intelligent design—some survivors must have intelligently
placed the message through choice with intent—is scoffed at. New
sciences emerge: coconology, sandology, evolutionary windology, “coco-
sando”, population coconetics, naturalized windo-teleonomy and so on.
These sciences are used to support the core belief—the illusion of
design—by logically unsound metaphysical interpretations of observed
and undisputed facts about sand, coconuts and ocean and wind
dynamics. The fact of evolution is now a bygone conclusion.
Then messages appear on beaches in different parts of the island,
far away from each other. “Help”, “SOS”, “Stranded” can be found.
The researchers reason that the same natural forces that explained
the first message can be used to explain these messages as well. They
invent labels for this process, parallel evolution, or convergence.
They argue that the same selection pressures were found in both
environments, and led to similar outcomes.
Then on a long stretch of beach in another part of the island, they
find a series of messages that are separated from each other by a
distance but work together as a single message. “Shipwrecked and
stranded”, “need food, SOS”, “have sick and wounded, help”, “come
south east”, “help”. The investigators reason that these individual

@abuiyaad | aboutatheism.net | 36
 A MUSLIM’S GUIDE TO NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND ATHEISM

messages were intended to work together and so they call it

complimentary coevolution. Natural forces led to complimentary
instructions, without purpose and design of course. By now, the
empirical data is showing that the messages are all written in the
same language, use the same token-symbol system (alphabet), and
have similar sequences in different places such as “stranded”, “SOS”
and “help”, thus, the messages have coconetic similarities. However,
another observation is made. It appears that the messages are
crafted in such a way so as to resemble various font types. Some are
are in sans and others are in serif.
Phylococonetic analysis [a study of the inferred evolutionary
relationships between the messages through the field of coconetics—
that is: how coconut sequences in the message affect physical form]
demonstrates a connection between the existence of a certain word
in the message and the morphological features [font type] of the
message. A branched tree emerges from the data. All of this proves
unequivocally that evolution took place through the forces of nature
and random variations. Common ancestry and evolution is now a
fact. The evidence is undeniable. Numerous other fields of
knowledge are devised to study this natural phenomena in more
detail to provide additional intellectual fulfillment to sagacious
believers. The combined knowledge and evidence from all these
fields validate the synthesis which is only denied by the “wicked”.
A very elaborate intellectual, academic, scientific ring-fence is
put around this doctrine after it has been imposed and taught in
schools, colleges, universities and institutions. Dissenters, apostates
and heretical innovators are outcast, stripped of their jobs and
livelihood. Large numbers just go with the flow to protect livelihood
and liberty and cower under this new intellectual authority.
The activities of all naturalist, atheist evolutionists are to be seen
as an ongoing attempt to convince people of completely naturalistic
explanations—absent choice with intent—for the appearance of the
messages, hoping that one day, the mechanism will be cracked and
empirically demonstrated despite the fact that decades of laboratory
tests with sand, coconuts, leaves, twigs and a wind-machine have

@abuiyaad | aboutatheism.net | 37
 A MUSLIM’S GUIDE TO NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND ATHEISM

failed to generate such a message, or create a novel message from a

pre-existing one. In the meanwhile, they continue to deceive others
about the reality of their religious, naturalist beliefs through the use
of broad, catch-all language such as:
“Evolution of messages is a fact.”
“Observed similarity of sequences is proof of common ancestry.”
“Phylococonetics has proven evolutionary relationships between
the messages, hence evolution is a fact.”
“Message body-plans have clearly observed similarities.”
“Variation in coconut alleles over the generations of coconuts
making up the messages is observed, hence evolution is a fact.”
“Its about time that all faiths accepted evolution, the evidence is
just so overwhelming.”
The above master analogy presented here very quickly—though
rattled and aggrieved evolutionists may come back and throw
stones—is in fact a close enough and accurate portrayal of exactly
what they are up to.
This book is a modest effort in trying to simplify the naturalist,
atheistic religious doctrine so that its reality can be unmasked and
understood by layman and learned alike, by Allāh’s permission.

Abu ʿIyāḍ Amjad Rafiq

10 Jumādā al-Awwal 1438 / 7 February 2017

@abuiyaad | aboutatheism.net | 38