Episode 55 – “No Clash” and Interpreting the Quran

A Critique of No Clash: Bending the Quran to Scientific Myths

Peace be upon you, dear viewers. I have repeatedly been asked about the program There Is No Clash, presented by a British broadcaster with Muslim funding. No Clash means there is no collision or conflict, specifically between observational, experimental science and the Quran.

The Method Used by No Clash to Establish Alleged Agreement

How does the program attempt to prove this? I watched several episodes and found that its method operates as follows. First, it asks what scientific fashion is currently popular. It then searches the Quran for verses from which particular words can be extracted, removed from context, assigned imposed meanings, and shaped according to that fashion. When scientific research provides conflicting figures, it selects whichever figure agrees with the scenario already drawn for the Quranic verses. It then announces that the Quran not only avoids conflict with scientific facts but brought them more than fourteen centuries ago.

People are told that God's words “So I swear by the retreating stars—those that run their courses and disappear” concern the Higgs boson, and that “Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth” concerns quantum light and light emitted by plant chlorophyll, and so forth.

Bending the Quran to Scientific Myths: Evolution as an Example

The program does not merely reshape Quranic verses to fit disputed scientific fashions; it also reshapes them around myths, such as the myth that humans evolved from lower organisms, whose falsehood we demonstrated in detail in the previous episode.

An example is an episode titled The Quran Proves Evolution and Humanity's African Roots, which claims that Surat At-Tin anticipated Darwin by saying humans evolved from lower organisms. How?

They say the Quran selected the fig and olive as temporal boundaries for human evolution. Fig trees supposedly evolved eighty million years ago, while olive trees evolved from an ancestor one and a half million years ago. The program claims that eighty million years ago marks the beginning of primate evolution—the animals they call humanity's earliest ancestors—while one and a half million years ago marks the appearance of Homo erectus, one of the alleged humanlike transitional stages between animals and humans. The oath by the fig supposedly refers to primates because their evolutionary appearance coincided with the fig's, while the oath by the olive refers to Homo erectus because its appearance coincided with the olive's evolution.

Analyzing and Critiquing No Clash's Evolutionary Claims

Let us study each element of this connection and see within it the program's general method.

1. Reliance upon False Evolutionary Scenarios

First, in the previous episode we saw the reality of the alleged evolutionary line upon which the program relies. Darwinists themselves describe their scenarios in their most famous journals as confused, twisted, obscure, and complex, and they agree upon almost nothing. The first problem is therefore treating claims attributed to science as settled facts without separating what is sound from what is false.

2. Distorting the Meaning of "Best Form" and Linking It to Homo Erectus

Second, they say the olive's evolution coincided with the appearance of Homo erectus. In the previous episode, we cited Darwinian research denying that this separate being ever existed and saying that what was called Homo erectus was simply a human like us. But wait: why did the program select Homo erectus from among the organisms in the alleged evolutionary line? To match the expression "best form" in: “We have certainly created man in the best of stature”. They removed the word "form" from context, interpreted it as upright posture, and linked it to the alleged upright humanlike creature. It is as though God's words “We have certainly created man” concerned beings preceding us. They ignore the next verse: “Then We return him to the lowest of the low”, which shows, as we explained, that the form is a soundness of the soul and its innate disposition. They thus made “We have certainly created man in the best of stature” a statement about a fictional humanlike being in an equally fictional evolutionary line.

3. Distorting the Meaning of "Lowest of the Low" and Ignoring Quranic Context

Third, how did the program explain: “Then We return him to the lowest of the low”? It claimed this meant a human descended from a mountain in Ethiopia, in agreement with Darwinian claims that the first human appeared there. For them, "We reduced him to the lowest of the low" means descending a mountain, entirely detached from the following verse: “Except for those who believe and do righteous deeds”, which clearly shows that the descent is spiritual and psychological. Dear viewers, in the previous episode we also explained that even among Darwinists, the claim that the first human appeared in Ethiopia disappeared after the discovery of older skulls in Morocco, Tanzania, Chad, Kenya, and even outside Africa, including China. No problem: tell us about the latest discovery, and we will find other verses that can be interpreted to match the new estimates. In all this, we see the complete absence of a method for handling the Quran. Its words are treated as shapeless, disconnected material molded on demand.

4. False Assumptions concerning Evolutionary Estimates

Fourth, the program assumes that the myth's supporters agree upon estimates placing primate evolution and the evolution of figs and olives at those times. This too is false. They disagree about primates: some place their appearance sixty million years ago, others eighty million, others eighty-five million, and still others give different figures. On what basis did No Clash select eighty million years as the beginning of the alleged evolution of primates claimed as human ancestors? There is no foundation or method; only the need to make the scenario fit the chosen figure for fig evolution. When God swore by the fig, did He make a mistake concerning the date of its evolution—exalted is God above that—or are you playing and stumbling in ignorance and audacity toward God's Book? This concerns the alleged date of primate appearance.

5. Incorrect Claims concerning Fig Evolution

Fifth, what about the fig, which they claimed appeared evolutionarily alongside primates? The program alleged that its cited study said figs first appeared in Africa eighty million years ago. Neither the cited study nor the report discussing it says figs initially appeared in Africa, so this is an incorrect claim by No Clash. Is eighty million years for the fig's appearance a figure upon which Darwinists agree? Again, no. As with primates, they disagree here as well. Some say figs appeared at least sixty million years ago, while others say seventy-five million. This is only what I saw in a quick review, not an exhaustive investigation. Moreover, all these estimates concern the emergence of the mutual relationship between figs and the insects assisting their pollination, which they treat as equivalent to the fig's own age. Will you again search for verses matching these conflicting estimates? There is no need even to mention the variation in estimates for the olive's appearance. This is the third observation: selecting studies without a method to fit a predetermined result. Disorder everywhere—scenarios assembled like a picture from scattered pieces of wood floating upon water, soon dispersed by wind and waves. Darkness layered upon darkness.

A Comprehensive Critique of the Program's Method and Effects

Those behind the program appear to have lost their compass. They cannot distinguish pseudoscience from genuine science and treat whatever some Western scientists announce as settled fact. The program possesses neither a linguistic nor a religious method. At the same time, its producers feel that what they regard as science threatens their Islamic faith, yet they do not wish to leave Islam. The result is what we have seen. Sometimes, brothers, a person attempting to serve Islam through ignorance harms it more than someone openly attacking it with bad intentions.

The method used in this and other episodes is a farce in the fullest sense. God Almighty describes His Book: “Indeed, it is a decisive statement, and it is not amusement.” The program's handling of the Quran combines one falsehood with another, while God Almighty says: “And indeed, it is a mighty Book. Falsehood cannot approach it from before it or from behind it; a revelation from a Lord who is Wise and Praiseworthy.” May God be pleased with Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, who said: "What earth would carry me and what sky would shelter me if I said about the Quran what I do not know?"

Without its producers realizing it, the episode turned the Quran into a tool for legitimizing pseudoscience, making viewers fear that doubting Darwin's myth might mean doubting the Quran itself. Do you doubt human evolution from lower organisms? Then you supposedly doubt Surat At-Tin. All of this attempts to persuade people that the Quran anticipated the claim of human evolution from lower beings, which we proved in the previous episode to be a myth and blind Darwinian doctrine. It champions a myth openly conflicting with the Quran and Sunnah and with a truth necessarily known in Islam and spread throughout many verses and hadiths: God created Adam with His hands and created his wife from him.

The Danger of Denying the Clarity of Quranic Meanings and the Prophet's Explanation

Here lies another important matter, brothers. Anyone manipulating Quranic interpretation in this way will try to convince you that the Quran has no definite meanings where one is true and others false. For such a person, the entire Quran becomes ambiguous, without verses of decisive meaning, although God Almighty says: “In it are verses that are precise—they are the foundation of the Book—and others unspecific.” This tendency appears among all who manipulate interpretation in this way: they generally cast doubt upon the precision of Quranic meanings. No Clash therefore dedicates an episode to the title The Prophet Muhammad Did Not Explain the Quran. Beware of those who tell you that the Prophet explained the Quran—as though they said: beware of anyone reciting God's words: “And We revealed to you the message that you may make clear to the people what was sent down to them and that they might give thought.” “That you may make clear to the people what was sent down to them” from the Quran, Muhammad. It is as though they said: beware of anyone reciting God's words: “Certainly did Allah confer great favour upon the believers when He sent among them a Messenger from themselves, reciting to them His verses and purifying them and teaching them the Book and wisdom, although they had been before in manifest error.” “Reciting to them His verses and purifying them and teaching them the Book”; teaching is something additional to recitation. Many hadiths show the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, explaining Quranic verses, but those discussing the Quran ignorantly wish to isolate the Sunnah so they can mold verses according to their desires.

The Difference between Quranic Scientific Facts and Myths

There is no doubt, brothers, that the Quran refers to scientific facts such as the stages of embryonic development, details concerning clouds, the barrier between two seas, and others. These are not fantasies like human evolution from lower organisms but observable facts. The Quran's indication of them is apparent rather than contrived and requires none of the manipulation we have seen.

Conclusion: A Noble Intention Does Not Justify Error

Someone may ask why I criticize people trying to persuade others that the Quran does not conflict with science, even if they make mistakes, since their intention is noble. Brothers, noble intentions do not justify speaking about God without knowledge, distorting Quranic meanings, or promoting error. Islam tolerates no falsehood or pseudoscience. What we see with our own eyes is that this method ultimately removes the Quran's dignity from Muslim hearts rather than bringing non-Muslims into Islam. We ask God Almighty to guide us and those responsible for the program, grant all of us beneficial knowledge, and employ us in His obedience. Peace and God's mercy be upon you.