The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Evolution is a religion

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Erudition has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/7/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 442 times Debate No: 94517
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (12)
Votes (0)




Hi I'm Thiest and I know that evolution is a religion because there is no proof for it and yet people still believe that that's how the universe came into existence.

By only micro evolution happens the rest are just religious.


The creator of this debate believes that evolution is a religion due to there being a lack of evidence to support it's existence (with the exception of micro evolution). First, let me provide just two definitions of the terms:

1. Micro evolution: Evolutionary change involving the gradual accumulation of mutations leading to new varieties within a species. (a. Minor evolutionary change observed over a short period of time.)

2. Macro evolution: Major evolutionary transition from one type of organism to another occurring at the level of the species and higher taxa. (a. Major evolutionary change, especially with regard to the evolution of whole taxonomic groups over long periods of time.)

Evolution on a macroscopic scale, a wholly scientifically explainable process spanning millions of years is the backbone of modern biology and one only has to do a couple of minutes of searching on the Internet, or at a library to discover credible sources determining it's importance in the existence of life.

I would now like to take this chance to ask my opponent to share the their reasons behind the statement "evolution is a religion" so I can gladly submit counter arguments.
Debate Round No. 1


I would like to thank Erudition for accepting the debate I would also like to explain my point.

Religion-A philosophy on how the universe came into existence, without any evidence.

Since evolution is a philosophy on how the universe came into existence and it doesn't have any evidence it's technically a religion.

The different types of evolution Cosmic evolution: the origin of time, space, and matter from nothing in the "big bang"
Chemical evolution: all elements "evolved" from hydrogen
Stellar evolution: stars and planets formed from gas clouds
Organic evolution: life begins from inanimate matter
Macro-evolution: animals and plants change from one type into another
Micro-evolution: variations form within the "kind"

Only micro evolution happens

Also I would like to touch on what you said about the earth being millions of years old because.
The orbits the sun slow it is receding away from the earth leaving us a couple of inches per year, which means the moon use to be closer but if we bring the moon in closer it would create a problem because the moon is what causes the tides, if the moon was closer the tides would be higher there is a law called the inverse square law if you brought the moon 1/3 the distance and square it you get 9 times the gravitational pull and if you were to do the math you would find out that the earth and the moon would be in contact just over 1 billion years ago the gravitational pull would have been too strong for life to exist on earth due to the heat it generated.


I would like to thank my opponent once again for the submission of their plausible counter-argument. Also I would like to reference two websites due to their included material within the oppositions counter-argument:

[1] and [2] (URL's will be provided at the end of this submission).


The first point that defines religion as a philosophy on how the universe came into existence seems to be a lacking one particular aspect of religion: that of the worshipped being or beings around which the religion is based. Also the statement that religion is a philosophy is questionable, as religion is fundamentally a belief system (or man-made doctrine dependant on personal opinion) where as philosophy is a critical assessment of the theories and beliefs that are available therefore religion and evolution are not philosophies they are subjects that philosophy seeks to explore through reasoning. The rudiments of this explanation for those interested are explored on the Qcc.cuny website.[3]

The idea that only micro evolution (out of the list that you provided) happens is wrong. Observations for example of stellar evolution including the birth of new stars has been observed and the birth of new stars continues to be observed by astrologists and astrophysicists worldwide. Stellar evolution happens, present tense.
Evolution being a theory may be proved or disproved according to scientific research, evolution has been monitored, assessed and theorised through the use of fossil collections and genetics using scientific evidence. Evolution, however macro or micro, is a scientific theory based on years of research of tangible things, religion is not.
Religion being a belief system seeks to withstand by it's very nature the challenge of proving it right or wrong because the act of believing in it means that it exists, it's continued existence is dependant on someone choosing to belief in it, the same cannot be said of evolution that will continue to happen whether we choose to believe in it or not.

My apologies that I am out of time for now and have a lot of work, I look forward to the next round.

References from my opponents argument:

[1] (2016). Six Meanings Of Evolution | Creation Today. [online] Available at: [Accessed 10 Aug. 2016].

[2] (2016). The Six Meanings of Evolution. [online] Available at: [Accessed 10 Aug. 2016].

[3] (2016). What is Philosophy of Religion. [online] Available at: [Accessed 10 Aug. 2016].
Debate Round No. 2


Very true I just used the wrong words tbh but actually I would argue that people see stars form people see stars blow up it's called a nova or a super nova if it's really big and sometimes a dust cloud moves away which gives sight of other stars, if this is what astrologist have said I would like to see the source.

Also I would disagree that micro evolution is a theory I would think that it's an actual fact something that takes place in animals and humans e.g. Some humans are tall some of us are small some of us have curly hair some of us have straight hair we have many different varieties of humans.

I would like to thank my opponent for thier argument I'm looking for to the next round.

This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Furyan5 2 months ago
Not as dumb as you think. It may not be a religion technically, but it is a belief. Science offers theories, not proof. Most people base their beliefs on what they have read and never actually performed the experiment themselves or witnessed the revelations firsthand. In that aspect, evolution and religion are similar.
Posted by missmedic 2 months ago
"Since evolution is a philosophy on how the universe came into existence and it doesn't have any evidence it's technically a religion." Wow r u dumb................................
Posted by Zaephou 2 months ago
Funny how the instigator thinks that we believe evolution is the cause of the universe. I think this is a troll
Posted by canis 2 months ago
And our grand...grand..grand mas and pas.
Posted by canis 2 months ago
We can see evolution at work under a microscope and i real life. An exampel are bacteria that get resistent to antibiotics...
Posted by Spacebarman97 2 months ago
The instigator isn't very intelligent. He is somewhat correct. But he is just looking to share his opinions, not debate. Evolution is not a religion, but however it is faith based. Now faith is not just a religious term, so don't get your shorts in a knot evolutionists. You guys say you have so much evidence for evolution. You guys have a problem accepting it as a theory. However probable you feel evolution is, it is not observable, repeatable, or measurable. And it is a rule that a theory must be confirmed by those things to be fact. Most of evolutionist supposed facts, and hard evidence are shady, and easy to shed doubt on. When it comes down to it, you guys have not seen something change. In fact if you look at the fossil record, you will find microevolution, but not macroevolution. You will always find a dog is a dog, and a cat is a cat. Everything stays within its kind. and that is why you guys must believe evolution is true, not know it is.
Posted by vi_spex 2 months ago
or knowledge is a cure to the cancer of religion on intelligence
Posted by missmedic 2 months ago
Statements like "Evolution is a religion" show the limit of your intelligence and the depth of your ignorance. Evolution is knowledge and knowledge is like cancer to religion. Christian don't know or don't want to know, because real knowledge eliminates faith. Without faith religion dies, but knowledge remains. Beliefs and faiths do not establish "truths" or facts, and evolution is based on facts whether you believe in it or not.
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.