RE: I Love You Enough to Burn You
May 8, 2011 at 12:13 pm
(This post was last modified: May 8, 2011 at 12:15 pm by fr0d0.)
(May 8, 2011 at 11:53 am)theVOID Wrote: Something being a belief does not imply it was either arrived at rationally or irrationally.Does an irrational belief nevertheless use rationality?
(May 8, 2011 at 11:53 am)theVOID Wrote: A belief is not a process either, it is a proposition for which we act as if it is true when relevant.No disagreement there, although I fail to see the relevance.
(May 8, 2011 at 11:53 am)theVOID Wrote: The bible states that God compiled the universe from existent materials?Not quite VOID. The description of functionality forms the framework within which God operates.... metaphysically & not physically. It's very clear.
(May 8, 2011 at 11:53 am)theVOID Wrote: If he were to be pedantic and claim "I know of no sufficient evidence" would you stop playing word games?How would that change his claim?
(May 8, 2011 at 11:53 am)theVOID Wrote: We both agree nature exists (I should hope), you are the one proposing supernature, as such you have the burden of proof.Stop backing up the diversion tactics VOID!
Let us address how Ace presumes to establish the non existence of supernature using nature. He makes the claim... let's see it defended or abandoned.
fr0d0 Wrote:What hasn't been proven? The source is internally coherent and presents a solid logical platform. If you contend that then please lets have your reasoning to address.Now come on fr0d0, you don't believe that the bible is entirely coherent or consistent.
[/quote]
Yeah I do. I don't know everything but from what I do know that has proven to be true, so I feel confident in asserting it.
(May 8, 2011 at 11:53 am)theVOID Wrote: And what is this 'logical platform' you have derived from it?My Christian faith.
(May 8, 2011 at 11:55 am)theVOID Wrote: Naturalism is a metaphysical position.So why does your sig qualify 'naturalism' with 'metaphysical'?
