I would say it’s the religion of naturalism, not science, since the Judeo-Christian worldview provides us with a solid foundation for the axioms necessary for science in the first place. For them, they need to borrow from that worldview in order to formulate polemics to attack it...
Lexinom, I think that’s a rational comment. I agree with your logic. The problem is, they claim that science proves their theory. If you only believe their interpretation, perhaps it comes close. The reality is, there other interpretations.
They use “science” as a club to beat non-believers over the head with. That’s why I reference their belief system as the religion of science. It requires faith to buy in. Therefore, it’s not confined to science.
If I don’t address this as the religion of science, they can simply continue to use the word science as if they own it. They don’t.
Both sides own it.
Is it the religion of naturalism? Do they claim naturalism provides the proof and hit everyone over the head with it? Not really.
I try to place the focus on the problem.
And you know what, that might not be right.
I don’t accuse every scientist of being a member of the religion of science, but when it comes to the origin of the human species and their belief system, I think it is the religion of science.
Not trying to be argumentative. Once again, I think your comments made sense too.