(October 14, 2017 at 2:00 am)Godisgood Wrote:(October 14, 2017 at 1:37 am)Tizheruk Wrote: 1. Richard Dawkins is not atheism nor is any one man
2. Naturalism is not atheism
3. Lawrence is Atheism .
4. Evolution is not Atheism nor is Abiogenisis .
What are you talking about?
Richard Dawkins is an atheist. He's not atheism.
Naturalism is known by other names: Atheism, scientific materialism, and secular humanism.
There are atheists who believe in evolution. They are called Atheistic evolutionists.
(October 14, 2017 at 1:52 am)Crossless2.0 Wrote: This is going nowhere fast.
If you have a point to make, aside from mere assertion, then make it.
Can you remind me, quickly, of what we were talking about. Im talking to other people and I dont remember. Sorry!
When considering how life began, there are only two options. Either life was created by an intelligent source (God) or it began by natural processes.
We aren't talking about anything specifically. I'm just waiting for the inevitable string of posts in which you make your argument from personal incredulity, wow us with the cosmological argument, claim without a shred of evidence that there are supernaturally based teleological processes at work, and otherwise run through the apologists' standard playbook.
*shrug*
But since I'm here:
Quote:Naturalism is known by other names: Atheism, scientific materialism, and secular humanism. (1)
There are atheists who believe in evolution. They are called Atheistic evolutionists. (2)
(1) You need to distinguish between metaphysical naturalism and methodological naturalism. A scientist who happens to be a Christian but otherwise does solid scientific work uses methodological naturalism as a matter of course (this doesn't apply to the hacks at the Discovery Institute, who are engaged in culture war -- not science). All metaphysical naturalists are atheists; not all atheists are metaphysical naturalists. Secular humanism adopts no particular stance on the question of metaphysical naturalism, and not all atheists are secular humanists.
(2) Lol. Called that by whom? The only people I've ever seen use such clumsy language to characterize people who have read and understood biology books are culture warrior creationists.