An interesting article by Steve Huffey. In the article he examines some often omitted quotes by Charles Darwin in “On the Origin of Species”.
“Did Charles Darwin Believe in Design? The answer may surprise you.” Steve Huffey
Did Charles Darwin Believe in Design? The answer may surprise you.
Haden Clark 
An interesting post. Here are a few observations if you’d care to discuss them? I do enjoy your content, even though I disagree.
1. Darwin was not fully correct. Even if he did include God at the summation of his work, it does not follow that God exists. (Plus, I don’t know the context, but it could have been unfavourable to not refer to God somewhere.)
2. I think the author conflates atheists with scientists? For example, his cites E. O. Wilson, a biologist (who may have been an atheist). There are atheists who do not believe in evolution. Indeed, an atheist does not need subscribe to any scientific idea. Atheism is, as commonly defined by atheists, a lack of belief about one proposition. Even if evolution was proven to be false, it would not follow belief in God was justified.
3. “For the truth, Religion must go to the original source: Darwin, not writings of most atheists!” Does the logic apply both ways? i.e. when theists reinterpret passages from the Bible that are problematic, can we discount them as they are likely to have been revised (in an interpretive sense)?
4. “Darwin was interested in visioning the God of Nature, but many atheists re-vision Darwin by ‘non-random selective’ bias in journalism.” Strictly speaking, Darwin phrasing a ‘God in Nature’ could be seen as bias. We all have bias. But subsequent theorising seem to indicate evolution is an entirely natural phenomenon with no need for a creator.
5. Even if Darwin puts the word God/creator throughout his work, it just shows he was wrong about that, but correct about the mechanism.
Hope you are willing to discuss.
LikeLike