Why do some atheists think that evolution disproves a creator?

And the New Testament. There is no credibility to the Bible except for believers. Myself, the imaginary religion of Scientology has more coherence.

 

I agree with you.

Neither entails the other and, although I do not believe in god, that existence of evolution is not an argument for this.

Only for an omnipotent god.

 

I don't feel that your argument really follows. Although I do not believe I god, personally, why does the quality of gradual creation negate the presence of an overseer?

 

Because it completely contradicts the myth christians have been peddling for thousands of years, read it its not an 'overseer' they've started saying that in the last 10 years because evolution disproves their lies, for the two thousand before that it was a 'creator' then evolution proved that nonsense.

 

I would say it discredits a literal interpretation of the bible but not god or Christianity in general.

 

I would say it discredits all of it, christians have told us god created us for thousands of years, now we know that's not true. Its a little bit of a problem for them.

 

It's not "atheists" who think this...it is rational people who think this...that is, people who believe Evolution to be true because of all the concrete evidence available for it. It is not the "atheist" who is demanding that theists be intellectually honest. It is the rational person who is demanding it.

 

As a non-believer, I don't think evolution disproves the god concept. It shows we have objective proof that our existence as we know it came to being without the need of a god so it makes it easier to disregard the god theory. Let's face it, if you can't prove the fundamental view of believing in a god or gods what is the point of believing? That fundamental view is that said be god or gods created everything. Without that, you don't have much to offer.

Also it is hard for many to accept the immoral and vile characteristic of said be 'theistic/poly-theistic using the theory of evolution as its technical 'genesis story'. The theistic/poly-theist evolutionist argues in favor of what incidentally is a vile and immoral creator. That creator allowed the demise of numerous species to get to a so called perfect design to be able to survive and for what purpose, the purpose that deity or deities' will. That may only be on a moral level and not on some objective level in regards to evidence but regardless that is a bitter pill to swallow and to try to mask it through the multitudes of theological persuasions.

 

while evolution may not disprove the concept of god, it does disprove most religions (ie christianity, islam, or basically any religion that has a creation story, which is most of them).

So if you accept evolution (as any logical person would), then you can continue to believe in a personal god. But it's going to be some amorphous being that you concocted in your own head. It's not going to be one of the main religions that society has created.

 

Agreed. Evolution does disprove literal interpretation of creation myths for all religions.
I didn't see a reason to bring that up simply because the OP seemed to me at least, to want to discuss evolution and the god belief and not specific creation stories. The topic seemed more generalized and not specific.

Plus I have no reason to pinpoint specific myths and quote the verse from a literal interpretation vs. to show how evolution disproves it. No reason to do that because I see nothing good in the literal interpretation. That's a discussion for people who want to argue over how the theory of evolution disproves which verse in a mythological book they choose to discuss at that time.

 

According to the bible, God created earth in 6 days. And many Christian believed this to be fact. It was fact for many christians only 1 or 2 generationso ago. God is god and he can do anything after all right?

But then you see a sudden shift in Christian start imaging that it had to be god days. Like the bible ever spoke of such things. Christians make up things as is convenient and call what they will metaphors as convenient. Like they know how long gods day is. This is based on NOTHING but baseless ASSUMPTION.

The bible is very particular in its details. For example I recall this one passage.

He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. 16Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.” Mark 16:14

So I had this debate before. Christians were quick to call the deadly poison thing a metaphor when they couldn't explain my question.

But here's another question.

Is casting out demons a metaphor?

Is healing the sick a metaphor?

Is speaking in different tongues a metaphor?

No?

Why would the snakes and the poison which are used in the SAME context and sentence be a metaphor then? Because it's convenient? Sounds like calling things metaphor is more convenient than for Christians to say that they are wrong.

Because if not, I would challenge christians on this website to drink deadly poison and handle venomous snakes with bare hands. You believe right?

At this point you might say "That's tempting god and that is never allowed"

Why would it be tempting god? Is healing the sick and casting out demons tempting god? No? Then why would drinking deadly poison be?

No, instead think of it as a celebration of the gifts that Jesus gave you guys. He did give you those gifts didn't he? He said that he did at least.

So what a better way to celebrate Jesus' birthday than to celebrate the gifts that Jesus gave you guys for believing? You do believe don't you?

So drink some deadly poison to celebrate gods gift to you for Christmas. Yeh, do it for Christmas. And Jesus too of course If you believe in Jesus and die anyway, then Jesus must not be who he said he was or he must be a liar. How many christians can heal the sick by laying their hands on them I wonder?

Either way, if you die, then he would be a liar, so pick you poison

 

Oh and the whole thing about making Adam out of clay and using the rib from Adam to create Eve thing.

Lord God formed a manc from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

That's not the way evolution says it happened...

8Now the Lord God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed. 9The Lord God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

The bible also said that God made eve out of nothing but Addams rib.

Evolution like totally teaches this. I recall when I read about this in the textbook on evolution back when....