RE: [asa] scientism question

Keith said:
" Lastly, the rejection of the existence of God, or of a personal Creator
God, is a theological claim. Science is not the arbiter of this
question. The question must be argued and defended on
theological/philosophical grounds. Atheism, or any religious or
non-religious claim is a metaphysical claim. "

This atheist says he does not believe in God (just as he does not believe in the tooth fairy or Santa). He claims to have no "beliefs" in anything. He says that if you believe in God, then it is up to you to justify. Since he doesn't, he has nothing to justify. Same with the spirit- if you think it exists, then you justify it- he doesn't have to justify it as he has no belief. Same with life after death- he says the body dies and that's it. If you think something else happens, that's your belief and up to you to validate- not him.

See my difficulty in dealing with him? I'm trying to challenge him and get him to see that everyone has a "belief system."

...Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of kbmill@ksu.edu
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:43 AM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] scientism question

Bernie wrtoe:

> A questions about the 'scientism' worldview (science is the only
> reality). (I'm dealing with an atheist like that.)
>
> If a person says they accept only 'science,' should they have a
> logical issue with evolution since there is no scientific
> understanding of how biological life can arise from non-life? Seems
> like abiogenesis is a 'belief' based on the evidence indicated by
> science in general, yet the atheist I'm dealing with claims to have
> "no beliefs of any kind."

Just a few very brief comments.

Firstly, the fundamental assertion of biological evolution is common
descent. The validity of common descent is in no way dependent on a
resolution to the question of the origin of life.

Secondly, origin of life research has made significant advances and
greatly enlarged our understanding of a number of critical biochemical
and geological problems. I see no reason why origin of life research
will not continue to be fruitful. I also would not be surprised that
some very plausible scenarios for the origin of life will be eventually
forthcoming. The development of a consensus theory would in no way
threaten the Christian theology.

Lastly, the rejection of the existence of God, or of a personal Creator
God, is a theological claim. Science is not the arbiter of this
question. The question must be argued and defended on
theological/philosophical grounds. Atheism, or any religious or
non-religious claim is a metaphysical claim. "Nature is the only
reality" is a metaphysical claim and must be defended as such. Failure
to do so is making no argument at all.

Keith

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Jan 8 16:01:46 2009