I call it scientific reasoning VOID, because it's the search for material justification of the immaterial. The hypothesis isn't applicable to the subject. It's really as simple as that.
Theology is entirely reasonable. Your quest here isn't.
2. So your "good reason not to believe" is irrelevant?
The founding fathers didn't simply assert it, they made detailed accounts of their reasoning. You're completely dismissing the notion of divine simplicity, and I'm just pointing out your error to you. Hopefully you'll see that you need look into that before dismissing it without consideration.
Theology is entirely reasonable. Your quest here isn't.
2. So your "good reason not to believe" is irrelevant?
The founding fathers didn't simply assert it, they made detailed accounts of their reasoning. You're completely dismissing the notion of divine simplicity, and I'm just pointing out your error to you. Hopefully you'll see that you need look into that before dismissing it without consideration.
