Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 77 (8973 total)
197 online now:
Coragyps, GDR, JonF, kjsimons (4 members, 193 visitors)
Newest Member: Howyoudo
Post Volume: Total: 875,676 Year: 7,424/23,288 Month: 1,330/1,214 Week: 342/303 Day: 71/68 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Methodological Naturalism is fallacious
Granny Magda
Member (Idle past 43 days)
Posts: 2381
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007

Message 8 of 50 (514426)
07-07-2009 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by mike the wiz
07-07-2009 6:40 AM

Argument in a Box
Hi Mike,

(edit. I should add that yes I am aware that pure science on a smaller scale, also logically assumes that God isn't necessarily involved. However - I will let you figure out the rest. Rest-assured, I have thought it all through, as per usual.)

Huh? To me, the above reads like this;

I am aware that there is a glaring hole in my argument, big enough to drive a monster truck through, but I assure you, I have an ingenious solution to this problem. I keep it locked in a box, which is buried in my back garden.

What? You want to look inside the box?

No. Sorry.

I can assure you though, that I just took a look inside the box myself, and the argument is there. It's very convincing. Trust me on this.

Can you see why I'm not very impressed yet? How about it Mike? Can we see inside the box?

Mutate and Survive

"The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." -- Rev. Dr. Francis H. Wade

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by mike the wiz, posted 07-07-2009 6:40 AM mike the wiz has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020