Replies

Not everyone who believes in a god (or a God) believes in one that has the exact attributes that you claim that it has. They are not atheists merely because they disagree with the exact nature of God.

You're mischaracterizing the lady's points. That's ungentlemanly of you:

(1) Lady Eileen did not refer to God as "it". She quoted the Bible, the God of which is personal. Any God that could be called "it" couldn't be the Creator, so such inferior concepts of God aren't worth bringing up in the present discussion. They would be straw men, not gods.

(2) The lady also did not claim that all who believe in evolution are atheists. Suggesting so is perhaps an effective technique to divide the opposition, but it's not very sporting.

Lady Eileen did not refer to God as "it". She quoted the Bible, the God of which is personal. Any God that could be called "it" couldn't be the Creator, so such inferior concepts of God aren't worth bringing up in the present discussion. They would be straw men, not gods.

For crying out loud, this is semantics. I was referring to Lady Eileen's comment that "Evolution with God is a contradiction in terms." It is clear that there are those who believe in a personal God who also accept evolution.

The lady also did not claim that all who believe in evolution are atheists.

She did a good enough job of suggesting it. "I do believe in recognizing it for what it is, which is naturalistic (i.e. God free).".