 
|
 Return to the Guestbook |
| |
Guest |
Comments |
Date |
|
| |
Paul G. Taylor
|
In reply to Paul (2) Paul wrote: -- “It is amazing that the arguments that seem so right to you seem so wrong to me” Not amazing at all really, it just shows that what you start with as your presuppositions limits and controls what your conclusions will be. Logically, all conclusions depend on the starting axioms. If you start by assuming that God does not exist then all your explanations will logically leave Him out as well. But what does that prove? At most, it proves that you have been consistent in applying your axioms. Call that ‘scientific proof’ if you will, but it is no more than your say-so. Begin with assuming God does exist, a much better starting point unless you are omniscient, then you can consider all the evidence and weigh up logicallywhether it supports ‘creation’ or ‘naturalism’ better. |
4/23/2004 4:11:46 AM |
|
|
|
|
