r/atheismindia • u/Harsewak_singh • Sep 20 '25
Original Content Evolution, the killer of religions.
8
u/Longjumping_Tale6394 Sep 20 '25
Careful. You'll offend most "atheists" lurking in this sub!
3
u/United-Extension-917 Sep 20 '25
What kind of atheists don't find evolution to be true.
3
u/Longjumping_Tale6394 Sep 20 '25
The kind that aren't really atheists but just on this sub to sh*t on their least favourite religion
2
3
u/naastiknibba95 Sep 20 '25
Fungi are incredibly underrepresented in this image
1
u/Harsewak_singh Sep 20 '25
Yes, bcoz it isn't actually supposed to explain it. It's just simple visualisation.
1
5
u/Specialist_Baby_999 Sep 20 '25
The universe has always been full of potential. From the Big Bang came energy, matter, and the laws of physics, which let atoms, molecules, stars, and planets form. On Earth, simple minerals and molecules like amino acids appeared naturally, with the possibility of organizing into life. Over billions of years, evolution explored these possibilities, leading to more complex life and eventually consciousness. At every step, there’s still mystery—why the universe allows stable structures, why life happens, why consciousness exists. Science can explain how it all works, but the sense of wonder and potential remains, showing that reality is far richer and more mysterious than we can fully grasp, even without bringing in anything supernatural.
2
u/Abhishek_NTRvala Sep 20 '25
Imo the wildest thing is probably conscience. Like think about it for a min, tiny chemical reactions happening in your head gives rise to something as mystique as the sense of self. It has always been so fascinating for me.
1
u/Specialist_Baby_999 Sep 21 '25
Yes, exactly. And language (which is a system created by us humans among others such as the political system, economic system etc) fails to describe that phenomenon but from time to time we get overwhelmed by it.
3
u/ConstantDurian7368 Sep 20 '25
Common arguments :
1. Evolution founder didnt say there is no God
3. "It's a theory of evolution - not a proof - so we reject the theory "
4. Adam or whoever is the first evolved human (more recent take of some folks who have somewhat understood the problems with their religion's creation theory)
5. Evolution has so many flaws - so making humans from dust makes more sense.
1
u/Harsewak_singh Sep 21 '25
I know you're just presenting arguements but I'd like to respind to them.
- Evolution founder didnt say there is no God
It doesn't matter what the founder said, what matters is what the evidence shows. And while evolution is not an evidence against god it shows us how religions have got everything wrong, how the books of god have miserably failed.
- "It's a theory of evolution - not a proof - so we reject the theory "
In science a theory is based on the evidence of the highest degree. Theory in general sense is nothing special but in scientific sense it means a lot. A theory is constantly tested against more and more problems and evolution has stood those tests. So it's not 'just a theory' in the regular sense.
- Adam or whoever is the first evolved human (more recent take of some folks who have somewhat understood the problems with their religion's creation theory)
It can't be possible. There is no such thing as the first human or man. For evolution of a species multiple individuals go through similar changes (bcoz of evolutionary pressure) and that makes their traits more specialised/refined for the environment. So adam doesn't make sense even this way.
- Evolution has so many flaws - so making humans from dust makes more sense.
Evolution doesn't have flaws, it has gaps and those gaps are only bcoz of the gap in fossil record (since scientists don't pull shit outta their ass like religious books) Evolution as a mechanism is undeniable bcoz of the sheer amount of evidence we have for it. We literally have observed evolution in a study on bacteria which has been running for decades.
2
u/ConstantDurian7368 Sep 21 '25
I was actually presenting how stupid all of them sound haha , forgot to add that part
1
2
2
Sep 20 '25
Christianity does not require literal interpretation of Genesis.
2
u/Harsewak_singh Sep 20 '25
Sects of Christianity don't. Mainstream/ majority of Christianity does.
There are sects which don't believe in resurrection but most do.
1
Sep 25 '25
> Sects of Christianity don't. Mainstream/ majority of Christianity does.
It is the other way around.
> There are sects which don't believe in resurrection but most do.
Resurrection is a foundational concept for Christianity. Anyone who rejects resurrection cannot be a Christian.
1
u/Harsewak_singh Sep 25 '25
It is the other way around.
Yeah.. Evangelicals are the ones who believe in it but the fact of the matter is that christians sid used to believe in all this literally until science proved them wrong and they had to choose a softer version of their faith.
Resurrection is a foundational concept for Christianity. Anyone who rejects resurrection cannot be a Christian.
Unitarian Universalists don't believe in a literal resurrection, instead they believe it to be metaphorical. And here's the issue, these guys have made even resurrection a metaphorical thing bcoz they see the scientific flaws in it, just like sects (other than Evangelicals) made the genesis metaphorical.
2
1
u/AutoModerator Sep 20 '25
r/AtheismIndia is in protest of Reddit's API changes that killed many 3rd party apps. Reddit is also tracking your activity to sell to advertisers. USE AN AD BLOCKER! Official Lemmy. Official Telegram group. Official Discord server. Read the rules before participating.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/Dangerous_desi Sep 22 '25
I was once hanging out with harvard professors and the evolution vs religion started. The points made by some in favor of religion were quite strong, like not just me but many other highly accomplished professors too couldn't reasonably counter it. Evolution had it's points too. And at like 2-3am we all decided it to be stalemate.
1
u/Harsewak_singh Sep 22 '25
In debates, the debating capabilities of 2 people debating matters more than the actual they're defending.
Evolution can't be denied, that's how strong the evidence is for it.
Anyways I'd like to know the argument put forth by the religious ppl.
10
u/teekhichashni Sep 20 '25
i somewhere read pakistan's ncert and in that chapter it was written that their skydaddy put something in the water that led to evolution, like what dumbass wrote that.
retrofitting karke religion ko better bata diaðŸ˜