firedragon
Veteran Member
I would like to understand from members how they would think or believe that Darwinian Evolution negates the existence of God. Does it?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How does Darwinian Evolution negate the existence of God?
- Thread starter firedragon
- Start date
Not at all.
It does negate some specific god claims, but not the idea of a god at all.
Keeping an open mind about such things is important, imo.
It does negate some specific god claims, but not the idea of a god at all.
Keeping an open mind about such things is important, imo.
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
It doesn't.
The only kind of God evolution negates the existence of is a very literal, fundamentalist, seven-day creation view of God. Heck, even then there are probably ways to accept both.
The only kind of God evolution negates the existence of is a very literal, fundamentalist, seven-day creation view of God. Heck, even then there are probably ways to accept both.
Gods come as package deals with religions.
Many religions with a God have beliefs about the origins of life that are incompatible with a worldview rooted in science and evidence.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
I'm not sure I've met more than a few of those sorts.
How does it negate the existence of God?
Did Darwin go up to the heavens and zap God out of existence?
Because that would make a cool anime, ngl
exchemist
Veteran Member
It doesn't, any more than any other theory of science does.
It's obviously true that it is incompatible with a literal reading of the first book of the bible, but then so is half of astronomy, cosmology and geology too. But then the first book of the bible has been seen as allegorical since the dawn of Christianity anyway, so there's nothing difficult about that.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
The "disprove God" claim tends to come from creationists. They make.the error of thinking that just because their personal version of God has been shown not to exist that means all versions of God are refuted.
No. I don't see that it does.
However, it would be problematic in terms of certain conceptions of God, and certain beliefs around God and the development of species.
Audie
Veteran Member
We are not stupid.
osgart
Nothing my eye, Something for sure
Evolution is understood from the outside in and not from the inside out. There could be an adaptive intelligence inherent in nature leading to a powerful eternal source.
The Gods that are ruled out are the all present, all mighty and all powerful kind. Gods that are bound by nature are not ruled out.
And who is to say that there isn't a hidden nature that forms the cosmos. Who is to say that consciousness isn't fundamental?
I know people go by their human senses only but there are reasons not to. Many of those reasons are thrown under the bus but they make a lot of sense.
The Gods that are ruled out are the all present, all mighty and all powerful kind. Gods that are bound by nature are not ruled out.
And who is to say that there isn't a hidden nature that forms the cosmos. Who is to say that consciousness isn't fundamental?
I know people go by their human senses only but there are reasons not to. Many of those reasons are thrown under the bus but they make a lot of sense.
Regiomontanus
Eastern Orthodox
No, of course it does not.
firedragon
Veteran Member
Who?
exchemist
Veteran Member
Excellent question!
firedragon
Veteran Member
How is that type of God ruled out?
firedragon
Veteran Member
By origin of life do you mean evolution or abiogenesis?
Well, both.
I can't think of a discipline of science that doesn't conflict with the beliefs of some religion somewhere.
firedragon
Veteran Member
Okay, since you said "incompatible with a worldview rooted in science and evidence." what evidence do you have for the fact of abiogenesis?