RE: Street Epistemology - Practice
December 4, 2017 at 7:03 am
(This post was last modified: December 4, 2017 at 7:46 am by RoadRunner79.)
(December 4, 2017 at 6:29 am)curiosne Wrote:(December 3, 2017 at 11:08 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: I don't think I would say 100%. For one, putting numbers on such things always seemed kind of artificial to me. And certainly, there are situations where I would be more confident (such as something which I personally seen for myself, and is corroborated by others. However I would stand by fairly confident and willing to die for (for what you make of that).
As to the arguments of philosophy and natural theology. I don't think that there is a direct connection. And I don't really see why there would be. By their nature, these are arguments in the generic. They provide parts of the picture, to which I find the historic revelation of the Judeo Christian God aligns with that description. That is how the connection is made.
ok so point one by itself doesn't in itself provide a "direct connection" that your God exists. Is this the same case for point two also?
Yes... as I had said before. They are not going to give you specifics or tell you things other than what they point to.
It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. - Alexander Vilenkin
If I am shown my error, I will be the first to throw my books into the fire. - Martin Luther
If I am shown my error, I will be the first to throw my books into the fire. - Martin Luther
