Debating Darwinism and Religion

There’s literally no god or established organization attached to that, calling it a religion is just a derogatory statement to make yourself sound right. Calling Darwinism a religion is honestly ridiculous, that’s like calling paleontology a cult.

It is a religion in the sense that it takes, on faith, the notion that human beings are electrified soup. It has missionaries who go to public schools and universities trying to convert creationists. It has high ranking churchmen who are esteemed and respected above everyone else (Hawking, for example), it views rejection of the narrative as Heresy, and excomunicates from participation in many aspects of the scientific community its skeptics.

Fairh isn’t a thing in science, proof is, and if there’s enough satisfactory proof, then that tends to convince people to believe a theory. The Big Bang has the most physical and tangible proof of any theory of the universe, and as such, is considered the most likely option, therefore, what’s most likely is what’s taught. The “missionaries” are normally what you call teachers, you know, the people who already live and work around the school being taught at. You say it like teachers just walk up to random religious groups then start reading scientific textbo…  Read moreoks, when the direct opposite is far more common. High ranking “churchmen” are scientists who’ve helped them formulate and refine useful and reliable theories, such as thaf of evolution, general relativity, the creation of nuclear weapons, or rocket science. These guys aren’t “churchmen”, they’re just important people, same way as a president or a notable character in a show. Rejection of the common narrative without any real proof that’s capable of taking down current theories tends to lead to merely being discredited. Settled science being rejected leads to losing your license, because that information is obviously false. Skeptics aren’t the problem, disinformers are. Scientists are allowed to disagree on climate change, they just need proof in their side. Scientists that fake their credentials, fail to cite sources, and use bad methods of getting a result are often the ones kicked out, the same way as an unruly worker.

Oh don't stop talking – enlighten me! If the Big Bang has physical and tangible PROOF, provide it now. In fact, since you've made that claim, you essentially lose this debate if you CAN'T prove it. Oh, and PROVE Evolution. Do both please. I've PROVEN Christianity, let's see if you can even provide any significant EVIDENCE for your materialistic perspective.

For the Big Bang, there’s the observable fact that the universe itself is expanding, as differences between galaxies and other galaxies has been increasing via some unknown force, often considered to be the expansion of the universe aided by dark energy pushing things apart.

Which, in and of itself, proves absolutely nothing. The fact that the universe is expanding which creationist welcome and accept, is not proof that with zero fuel, oxygen, heat, and even space in which to exist, an explosion of absolutely nothing created all the matter in the universe, a hypothetical event that would…  Read more, if true, be an egregious violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics, i.e., that both matter and energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Of course, both worldviews involve the creation of matter, but whereas in the naturalistic viewpoint, the matter was created by absolutely nothing, for nothing existed before the alleged explosion, in the creationist viewpoint, matter was created by an omnipotent God who exists apart from space and time and wrote the Laws of Thermodynamics Himself. In fact, thousands of years before the advanced scientific instruments required for such observations of the cosmos were invented by the mind of man, the Bible revealed that the cosmos were in fact being stretched, and expanding. "The LORD wraps himself in light as with a garment; he stretches out the heavens like a tent..." (Psalm 104:2). Just as the Scriptures went against the scientific ideas held by the ancient world, establishing that the earth was round (Isaiah 40:22), so God also revealed through the authors of the Bible, who had zero comprehension of the implications of what they were writing, that the universe is in fact expanding – the most complex of astrophysics, millennia ahead of its time. Pretty good for what atheists like to call a Book written by "uneducated shepherds."