EvoWiki is now a project of the RationalMedia Foundation.
We are moving all content to RationalWiki.
See the EvoWiki project page for details!

Evolution is atheistic

From EvoWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Claim

Evolution is atheistic.

Source

Responses

  1. Initially, this claim is a simple misuse of the world "atheistic" when "secular" is more appropriate. However, as appears to be the case with many flawed arguments the misuse of terms is intentional. In this case, by labeling evolution as "atheistic" the creationist is able to slur evolution in the eyes of any theist.
  2. Since evolution doesn't even mention God, it cannot be said to either affirm or deny the existence of God. Evolution's failure to mention God is shared by stamp collecting, baking cheesecake, and the rules of American football; why, then, is it that those Creationists who have a problem with "atheistic" evolution, do not have just as much of a problem with "atheistic" stamp collecting, "atheistic" cooking, or "atheistic" football? A fitting comparison along the same lines extends to the secular United States Constitution which although leaving room for God, doesn't confirm or deny his/her/its existence.
  3. Evolution (changes in life) happens, God or no. The Theory of Evolution is the scientific explanation for how evolution happens and what the history of it has been. Although it is true that science provides naturalistic explanations, it does not deny the existence of God.
  4. Many believers also accept evolution.
  5. Creationists readily accept observed natural phenomena as the work of God (flowers, mountains, childbirth, etc.), therefore evolution, an observed natural phenomenon, can equally be a part of a theistic world view.
  6. Saying "evolution is atheistic" is like saying "(osmosis/Brownian motion/light refraction in a prism) is atheistic" -- at worst, this anthropomorphizes a scientific description of a natural process by attributing to it an ability to hold a particular view on something the way a sentient being would; at best, it confers upon it the ability to somehow influence people's personal views on matters it does not even pretend to include.
  7. Even if the claim were true, it is not relevant. Whether or not Evolution is atheistic has utterly no bearing on its validity. Descent with modification happens, that's it.
  8. Darwin himself, and his correspondent Asa Gray, believed that evolution and religion are compatible. Darwin said this in the On the Origin of species, citing Charles Kingsley and Asa Gray as examples, and for himself, he had "never been an Atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God".
  9. If evolution is atheistic, how come prominent religious biologists, such as Theodosius Dobzhansky, Kenneth Miller, Francisco J. Ayala, Joan Roughgarde and Francis Collins, or even the two most recent Popes accept evolution and think that it is entirely compatible, if not required by their faith?
  10. add more responses

Fallacies contained in this claim

External Links

References

  1. Scott, Jon, 2000. [What was the inspiration for the Genesis Panthesis web site?]. See also: Harris, Adam N., 7/24/2000. Re: Jon Scott has a new website! Message-ID , [2]
  2. Morton, Glenn R., 2000. The transformation of a Young-earth Creationist. Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 52(2): 81-83. [3]

Further Reading

Related claims

See Also

Acknowledgments

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
RWF
Navigation
Toolbox