RE: Origin of Articles
June 18, 2012 at 10:03 am
(This post was last modified: June 18, 2012 at 10:05 am by elunico13.)
(June 15, 2012 at 2:32 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: It's already been explained to you ad neuseum that science (evolution) isn't a faith system (and you've been asked to provide your reasons for thinking otherwise, which you've never done).
It has also been explained to you ad neuseum that "laws of logic" aren't things or forces to be explained. They are observations of how things work. No deity is necessary.
Btw, I just so happened to have clicked on an older episode of "The Atheist Experience", picked almost at random, to listen to while working on something else. Right away, the host Tracy began talking about the Argument from Ignorance and why it isn't valid reasoning. It's so fitting to this discussion and to presuppositional apologetics, I'm going to link here:
Evolution describes (does not prescribe) the past using present findings. If you have ever considered the big bang theory to be even a remote possibilty you've put a BLIND faith into it. You weren't there to OBSERVE it.
About your video.
What would you consider a convincing peice of evidence for the biblical God?
Let's see if your answer would be inconsistant with how you've determined other things to be true.
Think this one through carefully, because any inconsistant answer would prove your biased position and psychological reason to hold to an atheistic view.
BTW: I wonder why no one can account for logic in their own worldview except for the Christian theist?
(June 15, 2012 at 5:25 pm)apophenia Wrote:
The best way, imo, to deal with these kind, is to give them what they want, give them all their assumptions, and see where it leads.
Let's assume the laws of logic depend on God for validity. Can we prove that God exists? We can't assume God exists, or else the argument would be circular. And since we must be neutral in our assumptions, and since the validity of logic depends on assuming God, we must assume, therefore, that logic is unreliable. Without logic, the presuppositionalist cannot demonstrate God, or really anything.
Therefore, since the existence of God cannot be demonstrated, because all human reasonings are unreliable, we have no reason to believe in God, the bible or anything. We can believe on faith, but since human reasoning is unreliable, it's impossible to tell which God or which reality to have faith in.
Under pressupositionalism, "All is Maya." All is illusion. There is no truth. Not even for the presuppositionalist.
Right on you have to assume logic before you can use it.
The christian can account for the laws of logic while other worldviews can't. You should do more research on circular arguments.
James Holmes acted consistent with what evolution teaches. He evolved from an animal, and when he murdered those people, He acted like one. You can't say he's wrong since evolution made him that way.
