Should DARWIN be regarded as a Prophet?

Answer 1

Not really, but then again. " There is no biology, but evolutionary biology and Charles Robert Darwin is it's" prophet" ".

Answer 2

Not particularly. He pretty much recycled the ideas of Herbert Spencer, although he did do some field research, even though his findings were flawed.

Darwin is quite misunderstood.

Survival of the fittest is NOT a darwinian idea; Darwin postulated that those species most capable of adapting would be most viable for a changing environment.

Perhaps one might review the evolution of his work, Origin of the Species to see how he adapted it to meet the political will of the time and popular appeal.

No, he is really more of a hack, and better work was done before and afterwards.

See Spencer for the popularization of the ideas Darwin lifted.

Answer 3

A prophet? Probably not. I think he would want to be regarded as a scientist, first and foremost. Did his theories change the way we perceived the world in a fundamental way? Yes. However, unless he either made very accurate predictions of the future, and unless he articulated current and future problems and offered viable solutions for them, I'd have to say that he doesn't fit the definition of a prophet.

For more info on prophets check out Mohammed, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos, and more of the Biblical prophets. You will find that they tend to predict (based on their conversations with God) outcomes, usually negative, and articulate ways that people (usually through obedience to God) could create an alternative and better outcome. They preach the word of God, they predict,and they offer hopeful solutions. If those solutions aren't met, than the prophet's accuracy is tested by the outcome. Does it really occur. The second phrophet test is limited to the Hebraic and Christian tradition and so does not apply to this conversation, as you did not specify what kind of prophet you meant.

Answer 4

Charles Darwin was not a prophet he was a Biologist and a scientist with superior observation qualities.
He was able to observe minor and advanced changes in different species of animals, according to the territory they lived in.
Being this the core of his theory, but now a proven fact.

That is, that living species evolve with time adapting themselves to the territory, food, climate they live in, as well as self defense characteristics they need to develop, survive and reproduce successfully.

Darwin presented his theory in his book "THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES" the 1 of July 1858 changing for ever the way man sees how all living things have come to be in this world.

Nevertheless this genial idea was received with mistrust.
The first observation Darwin recalled having received, was from a professor Haughton from Dublin who said "all that is new in this information is false and all that is true is old"

Answer 5

Darwin is a mentally retarded person who cannot accept the wisdom behind creation. The theory of evolution is was an easy way. Big bang and such other theories are more easier ones just like kid's stories.

There is wisdom behind every creation, even behind the existence of a dust particle.

Answer 6

No.

The idea is pretty insulting to him. While everyone else wanted to lay around and receive prophecies, he spent years and years comparing careful observations to each other to write several theses, one of which became the unofficial biology handbook for generations.

I would also think that a prophet would be more tolerant (closer to omniscient), but this man believed that in tribal people you could actually witness surviving ape-people societies; and a cousin of his, Frances Galton, spawned the Eugenics movement.

Answer 7

Darwin thought we evolved from monkeys. This is not a prophesy, it is only a thought of a man. A hypothesis. Our modern scientists stole the theory of the primordial puddle from Ahnies Book of the Dead. It is an ancient Egyptian writing. It stated that this puddle is HOW God made us. Each specie stepped out of the puddle separately. You can learn more about this process in my Book, if you contact Booksurge.com.

Answer 8

prophets rely on the unknown, the supernatural explanation and fairy tales to woo the masses. Scientists, like darwin rely on evidence, logic and rationality....sorry, not even on the same page.

Answer 9

No, he should be regarded as a scientist that can be supported or proven wrong at a future date. Should we treat science as sacred?

Answer 10

if he told that life on earth is but a series of changes(HIS THEORY OF EVOLUTION) then he merely threw light on one of the eternal truths of our existence. THATS NO PROPHECY.