Replies

So Dawkins does not believe in God, and thinks that scientists should not accept religious claims. We also have his opinion that evolution means it is not necessary to believe in God. What we do not have is a claim that the Theory of Evolution demonstrates there is no God.

If you will accept a little unsolicited advice, you should be more careful in what you assert. 'Sensitivity' is a very odd way of putting it.

So the relevance of evolutionary biology to atheism is that evolutionary biology gives us the only known mechanism whereby the illusion of design, or apparent design, could ever come into the universe anywhere.

Actually, the assertion is: at least one presentation of the Theory of Evolution states that it demonstrates there is no God?

I would also add that there are presentations of the Toe after which it is stated that this does not demonstrate there is no God.

Read above: "the relevance of evolutionary biology to ATHEISM."

Perhaps I'm just not smart like the rest of you folks, but this simple country preacher sees his point being supported. There is at least one presentation that says, "this is evidence there is no God."

The real issue is what Jesus says: "Seeing you might not see, and hearing that you might not hear.Mr 4:12 - That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.