RE: The Problem with Christians
March 3, 2016 at 7:39 am
(This post was last modified: March 3, 2016 at 7:53 am by AJW333.)
(March 3, 2016 at 7:06 am)pocaracas Wrote: Do try to keep in mind that just because we humans haven't managed to explain a particular phenomenon, it doesn't mean that this phenomenon is magical.... it just means that its mechanism eludes us, for the time being.
There are even some phenomena that will likely forever elude us, such as the Big Bang, or the exact mechanism by which abiogenesis happened on this planet... but that does not mean, in the slightest, that those phenomena happened due to some magical force.
Not suggesting a "magical force." I'm trying to keep things from getting hyper spiritual. Just dealing with definitions, in particular that of the word "supernatural" which seems to be somewhat misrepresented on this thread. I'd like to stick to dictionary definitions rather than people's personal definitions.
If a person posits that there are no such things as supernatural occurrences, and that any unexplained phenomena must have purely naturalistic explanations, how is this any different from an individual making an arbitrary declaration that God exists?
(March 3, 2016 at 7:28 am)robvalue Wrote: Our current models are not "natural law". They are "models of natural law". Can you not understand the difference?The particular example that I'm looking at is that of life being produced from life. Is it a law or a model? Given that there are no instances that have ever been observed of life coming from non-life, then I think it fair to say that it's more than just a model.
Do you have a reference book about the universe stating each and every natural law exactly and beyond question?
If it is true that "all life always comes from life," then surely this qualifies as a law.T
