In religious approaches to evolutionary theory, what scriptural elements (if any) must be maintained in order for a religious account to be compatible with both current scientific understanding and religious doctrine? The answer, mostly from accounts seeking to bring together Christian thought and evolutionary theory, has generally been that most scriptural claims that seemed incompatible with contemporary science need to be discarded entirely, ignored, or reinterpreted in ways that are consistent with scientific understandings. This is due partly to the fact that many such accounts were written by more progressive Christians who are comfortable with a wide range of interpretive positions, while accounts from more conservative points of view with more limited or literalistic understandings of scripture tend to reject scientific accounts as subordinate to the truth found in scripture. In recent years, this has begun to change as increasing numbers of non-Christian and evangelical Christian voices have entered the discussion.
Shoaib Ahmed Malik’s Islam and Evolution: Al-Ghazali and the Modern Evolutionary Paradigm represents such a voice from Islam. Malik writes from within the Asharite tradition, and more specifically from the perspective of the medieval theologian Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, which he explicitly states does not represent the views of all Muslims. The position he develops brings two important aspects to the broader religion and science discussion. First, it expresses a distinctively Islamic view that contrasts with more general Islamic approaches developed by such scholars as Nidhal Guessoum. Second, Malik espouses the view that al-Ghazali’s theology requires the direct creation of the first human (Adam) by God, but in a way that is fully compatible with evolutionary theory. A similar view from an evangelical Christian is expressed by S. Joshua Swamidass in The Genealogical Adam and Eve (InterVarsity Press, 2019).
Crucial to Malik’s conclusion is his understanding of al-Ghazali’s hermeneutics. This involves a five-level (ontological, sensory/phenomenological, conceptual, noetic, analogical), hierarchical model of scriptural interpretation, which begins with the highest, ontological level—the most literal and most restrictive interpretation—and progresses towards the lowest, analogical level, the most figurative and least restrictive interpretation. These interpretive levels are not mutually exclusive, however. The interpreter begins by seeking the ontological meaning of a passage. If such a meaning is not present, one moves on to the second level, the phenomenological meaning, and then progresses through the levels to the analogical level. Once one has established the level of the primary or authoritative interpretation of a passage of scripture, additional interpretations at any of the lower levels in the model are possible. Thus, a passage whose authoritative interpretation is ontological may have as many as four additional interpretations found in the four lower levels of the model, while an authoritative analogical interpretation can be identified only if one fails to find a sensible interpretation at any of the higher levels of the model. Applying this system to relevant passages from the Qur’an and hadith (secondary scriptures within Islam), Malik finds that Adam must be regarded as a historical individual created directly by God.
Notably, Malik had previously concluded that al-Ghazali’s theology in general was compatible with four Muslim responses to evolutionary theory: creationism, which sees everything as directly created by God; human exceptionalism, which sees human beings as directly created by God while all other life evolved naturalistically; Adamic exceptionalism, the view, mentioned above, that Adam is the sole exception to naturalistic evolution; and no exceptions, the view that all life evolved naturalistically, with no individuals or groups being directly created by God. However, al-Ghazali’s hermeneutics rule out the no exceptions option in favor of Adamic exceptionalism as the position that most satisfactorily relates al-Ghazali’s understanding of Muslim scripture to evolutionary theory. Malik argues that such a creation could be accomplished in a way that made Adam genetically consistent with an existing population of early humans, and, over time, would result in all humans today being genetic descendants of Adam, as Adam’s genes dispersed throughout the human gene pool. This view sets Malik apart from both Islamic creationists such as Adnan Oktar (Harun Yahya) and scholars such as Nidhal Guessoum who have suggested that the no exceptions position is consistent with Islamic theology. This latter group has much in common with progressive Christian scholars such as Keith Ward, John Haught, and Ian Barbour, who see evolutionary theory as fully compatible with theistic belief.
As mentioned in the opening paragraph of this review, Malik (along with his fellow Muslim scholar, David Solomon Jalajel, as well as the Christian scholars and scientists Swamidass, Dennis Venema, and Scot McKnight) represents a relatively new voice in the religion and science dialogue. Scholars such as Guessoum, Ward, Haught, and Barbour have often seen the truth claims of religious scriptures as qualitatively different from the claims of science. Thus, figures such as Adam and Eve could be regarded as mythical or metaphorical characters whose historical existence or nonexistence was irrelevant to the religious truths expressed in their stories. Hermeneutical considerations could mostly take a backseat to theological and philosophical issues in religion-and-science conversations. Malik and Jalajel, and Venema, McKnight, and Swamidass, take a different, contrasting, view. While rejecting the literalistic claims of Islamic and Christian creationists, they nonetheless hold out for an interpretation of their respective scriptures which is more strongly rooted in history. By seeking to reposition the claims of Islamic and Christian scriptures, the work of these scholars promises to deepen and enrich the larger discussion, and Islam and Evolution is a good first step in this direction.
Jim Sharp is an adjunct instructor of religious studies and philosophy at Colorado State University Pueblo.
Jim Sharp
Date Of Review:
March 28, 2024