Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
2,947
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 14:
Line 14: − + + + + + + + + + + +
supernatural and natural causation
|url=http://www.icr.org/article/newton/
|url=http://www.icr.org/article/newton/
|access date=22.04.2012
|access date=22.04.2012
}}</ref>|group=note}}, and [[Lord Kelvin|William Kelvin]] distinguished between primary and [[Natural causes|secondary (''natural'') causes]]. A ''primary cause'' was meant to be a ''first cause'' to explain singularities.<ref name="skeptics">{{Cite book
}}</ref>|group=note}}, and [[Lord Kelvin|William Kelvin]] distinguished between primary and [[Natural causes|secondary (''natural'') causes]].{{#tag:ref|Adherents of [[Methodological naturalism|methodological naturalism]] such as E.J.Larson often mistakenly portray these scientists as "freely mix[ing] matters of supernatural and natural causation" without recognizing the real difference they made between primary and secondary (natural) causes.<ref>{{cite book
|author=Edward J.Larson
|title=Evolution:The remarkable history of a scientific theory
|publisher=Modern Library
|location=New York
|year=2006
|page=110
|pages=350
|isbn=0-8129-6849-2
|url=http://www.amazon.com/Evolution-Remarkable-History-Scientific-Chronicles/dp/0679642889
|quote=Indeed, Isaac Newton, Johannes Kepler, William Gilbert, John Ray, and many other prior scientific luminaries freely mixed matters of supernatural and natural causation.}}</ref>|group=note}} A ''primary cause'' was meant to be a ''first cause'' to explain singularities.<ref name="skeptics">{{Cite book
| author = Norman L. Geisler and Ronald M. Brooks
| author = Norman L. Geisler and Ronald M. Brooks
| year=1990
| year=1990