(June 11, 2015 at 11:58 am)FatAndFaithless Wrote: No. They can't be investigated let alone refuted. You don't get to concoct unfalsifiable premises and then treat that as 'reasonable'.
(June 11, 2015 at 12:01 pm)abaris Wrote:(June 11, 2015 at 11:56 am)SteveII Wrote: Although I am not conceding that the arguments for Christianity are all weak, wouldn't a serious of even weak arguments, that are not scientifically refuted, serve as the basis for a reasonable belief system.
What's reasonable about believing hearsay and supernatural legends?
Zeus, Odin, Osiris, Allah or Vishnu haven't been refuted by science either. Fairies, unicorns and trolls under bridges also wait for the refuting business. Still, I guess, you don't believe in all of the above.
About as much is reasonable in believing in the Evolution, the Big Bang theory, M-theory, Gravitational Theory, and Black Holes. The theory or hypothesis serves as an explanation of the phenomena. That does not mean the theory IS the explanation for the phenomena. What is will not change regardless of our theories of what is as existence is not defined by us (realism)
