Do atheists think that evolution theory proves that there is no God?

[Bishadi]

That's a good question many might wish to discuss.

Why would any theist think that evolution is a tool to discount the idea of God?

Why would not believing in a God as the religions keep trying to describe; have anything to do with evolution?

We all know each person who we ever knew was born from a women, correct? (fell on our heads)

That no man was actually 'created' from dust and "poof" they became a man and then "poof" a rib was ribbed out and then a women was born?

Are there any here who actually believe in creation as magic from God (Allah/Krsna/Osirus/Zeus) or what ever book ye be readin?

 

[Magic Man]

Do atheist think that evolution theory proves that there is no God?

No, most atheists don't believe that the theory of evolution proves that there is no God.

 

[camanintx]

No, but Quantum Cosmology certainly does.

 

[Storm]

No, but Quantum Cosmology certainly does.

Can you summarize, put it in layman's terms?

 

[camanintx]

Can you summarize, put it in layman's terms?

As Stephen Hawking put it in "A Brief History of Time", in Quantum Cosmology, "there would be no singularities at which the laws of science broke down and no edge of space-time at which one would have to appeal to God or some new law to set the boundary conditions for space-time . . . The universe would be completely self-contained and not affected by anything outside itself. It would neither be created nor destroyed. It would just BE . . . What place, then, for a creator?"

 

[Storm]

Well, from your description, I have to disagree that it disproves God. It squeezes the God of the gaps into yet a smaller space, but we all know that's poor theology anyway.

I don't see why an eternal Creator deity couldn't Create an eternal universe.

Also, doesn't this contradict the well-established Big Bang theory?

 

[Valjean]

The idea that the TOE has anything to say about God or religion exists only in the mind of the religious Right. The connection never occurred to atheists., or biologists, for that matter.
The controversy is a manufactured one; a propaganda tool.

 

[Storm]

The idea that the TOE has anything to say about God or religion exists only in the mind of the religious Right. The connection never occurred to atheists., or biologists, for that matter.
The controversy is a manufactured one; a propaganda tool.

I don't know. We have several atheists on this board who have repeatedly asserted that ToE disproves God. Not that I've ever gotten any of them to explain how....

 

[oldcajun]

That's a good question many might wish to discuss.

Why would any theist think that evolution is a tool to discount the idea of God?

Why would not believing in a God as the religions keep trying to describe; have anything to do with evolution?

We all know each person who we ever knew was born from a women, correct? (fell on our heads)

That no man was actually 'created' from dust and "poof" they became a man and then "poof" a rib was ribbed out and then a women was born?

Are there any here who actually believe in creation as magic from God (Allah/Krsna/Osirus/Zeus) or what ever book ye be readin?

It all boils down to who you put your faith in, man's ideas or God.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The idea that the TOE has anything to say about God or religion exists only in the mind of the religious Right. The connection never occurred to atheists., or biologists, for that matter.
The controversy is a manufactured one; a propaganda tool.

The theory of evolution does say one thing about God: that Creationism does not work generally, and therefore doesn't work as an argument for His existence.

It also says that certain creation myths are not literally true, which can have implications for some people's ideas about God.

I don't know. We have several atheists on this board who have repeatedly asserted that ToE disproves God. Not that I've ever gotten any of them to explain how....

That's probably because the theory of evolution doesn't disprove God.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It all boils down to who you put your faith in, man's ideas or God.

Well, that's a false dichotomy if I've ever seen one.

And I think it's rather hubristic to elevate people's ideas about God to the status of God.

 

[Storm]

The theory of evolution does say one thing about God: that Creationism does not work generally, and therefore doesn't work as an argument for His existence.

When you say "Creationism," do you mean YEC, or Creationism in general?

It also says that certain creation myths are not literally true, which can have implications for some people's ideas about God.

Sad but true. I would like to point out, however, that theology does this as well.

That's probably because the theory of evolution doesn't disprove God.

Ya think? Still, it would be nice if they would at least TRY to formulate an argument to support such assertions.

 

[Storm]

It all boils down to who you put your faith in, man's ideas or God.

How do you know "man's ideas" don't come from God? Perhaps He no longer sends Prophets because we're sufficiently advanced to begin discerning Him through science.

My father always said: God exists. "If you would know His mind, study His works." Also, "Creation is God's only solo project."

Personally, I think the unspeakable elegance of nature reveals the glory of God better than any man-made book could ever hope to do.

 

[Autodidact]

The theory of evolution is correct.
If you believe in a specific story about a specific God that is contrary to ToE, then you believe wrong.
ToE does not disprove any God that is consistent with it, such as a Deist God, for example.
Whether you think ToE disproves Yahweh probably depends on your conception of Yahweh's nature.

ToE does contribute to a large body of knowledge that explains many of the things that people used to explain only by resorting to God or magic.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

No, but Quantum Cosmology certainly does.

As Stephen Hawking put it in "A Brief History of Time", in Quantum Cosmology, "there would be no singularities at which the laws of science broke down and no edge of space-time at which one would have to appeal to God or some new law to set the boundary conditions for space-time . . . The universe would be completely self-contained and not affected by anything outside itself. It would neither be created nor destroyed. It would just BE . . . What place, then, for a creator?"

In other words ...

If there is no need for God.
Then there is no need for God.
Therefore, there is no God.​

It needs work.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

When you say "Creationism," do you mean YEC, or Creationism in general?

I mean any form of Creationism that denies that the mechanisms of evolution caused speciation and the variety of life on Earth, and that some sort of deity created each species individually. I've personally heard young- and old-Earth versions of this.

I should probably point out that I consider the idea that God "started the ball rolling" and left evolution to run its course to be theistic evolution, which I consider something different than Creationism.

 

[Storm]

OK, that's why I asked. I personally have a much broader defintion of Creationism.

 

[camanintx]

Well, from your description, I have to disagree that it disproves God. It squeezes the God of the gaps into yet a smaller space, but we all know that's poor theology anyway.

I guess it depends on how you define God. Since my general definition includes creator of the universe, then a theory that doesn't allow for creation automatically disproves God.

I don't see why an eternal Creator deity couldn't Create an eternal universe.

Also, doesn't this contradict the well-established Big Bang theory?

The traditional Big Bang Theory only says that the universe was very hot and dense 10^-43 seconds after it began. Quantum Cosmology attempts to explain what happened during this period so there is no conflict.

 

[logician]

One problem here is defining exactly what "creation" means. Is it creating something (the universe or multiverse) from nothing, or is it merely creating order out of chaos i.e. "causing" matter to come to a singularity to explode in the big bang. Big differences there.

 

[Storm]

I guess it depends on how you define God. Since my general definition includes creator of the universe, then a theory that doesn't allow for creation automatically disproves God.

You ignored the explanatory part of my post: I don't see why an eternal Creator couldn't make His Creation equally eternal. Especially since time as we understand it is merely an aspect of the hypothetical Creation.