RE: No verifiable evidence is the Christian position
August 12, 2013 at 12:52 pm
(This post was last modified: August 12, 2013 at 12:55 pm by fr0d0.)
Esq:
1. logically it has to be an open answer, otherwise it would logically follow that we couldn't be addressing the supernatural.
2. You disagree about discerning the best answer? just, wow.
Just like any agnostic, I should not rule out the possibility that what looks to be utterly convincing may actually be incorrect, that it's all. I'm not choosing between equally convincing arguments, or I'd be an atheist.
3. Circular reasoning
The usual faith. Y'know, faith.
1. logically it has to be an open answer, otherwise it would logically follow that we couldn't be addressing the supernatural.
2. You disagree about discerning the best answer? just, wow.
Just like any agnostic, I should not rule out the possibility that what looks to be utterly convincing may actually be incorrect, that it's all. I'm not choosing between equally convincing arguments, or I'd be an atheist.
3. Circular reasoning
(August 12, 2013 at 10:42 am)Faith No More Wrote: If there is no verifiable evidence for Christianity, what do you propose should lead us to the conclusion it is true?
The usual faith. Y'know, faith.
