Search results

"I don't like this tiger. He reads minds."

Oh. I'm not trying to make any strong distinction between philosophy and science. Yep. I think that the presuppositional approach is the best one, especially when it comes to helping people assess their own beliefs. Trying to flesh out what I was trying to express a bit better with those...

What's the difference? Just name five.

Is there something wrong with being too right? Perhaps you do not know what it is to be right. Like who?

Hmmm. Good question. It's difficult to express what I'm thinking with an example, which might mean I'm thinking about this too much. Let me think on it. Yeah. The rhetoric I was trying to get across is that they can be right on things that do not show them that they are wrong about God.

The conspiracy theorists who think Joebiden won the election will do anything to justify their insanity.

Guilty! :D To arrive at truthful conclusions requires a willingness to accept the truth. They are similar concepts in some respects. I see them this way: Presupposionalism is a purely philosophical notion. Fear of the Lord requires a sense of the relationship between us and the Almighty...

I'll have to spend some time on it. It might be solved by me just reading more of your posts so I get what you're saying a bit better. Physical evidence? Or philosophical? I'm not sure I would say that science is blind. It's a tool wielded by people, so in that sense it might be blind, but...

I'll concede that they are very similar — perhaps indistinguishable — when all we can do is talk about them. ;) Aye, that's the goal. But reaching the goal has prerequisites that neither science nor philosophy can provide. Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. "I am the way, the truth...

I suspect that this is a false dichotomy, even though it does not appear to be. Kurt Godel would probably have reservations about the universe being describable with a single scientific theory. I know I do. There is more to the universe than science. Even though I'm sorta uncomfortable with...

A great big hole in the ground.

Do you know how to melt a planet?

Can you name one person on TOL — a YEC creationist — who says that you must believe as they do to be saved? Can you name one from anywhere? So you think God could not have created fertile soil without dead things, but He did make it look like dead things died in a flood and were frozen in...

Will that be warmer than it is now? I'm freezing.

The claim: The refutation: Because you say so? Yep, that's good enough. That which is presented without evidence can be sensibly rejected for any reason. But just to make doubly certain that we are on the right side here, let's go through some of the science in the Bible: 👍👍👍👍 Genesis 1:1...

That's awesome. Thanks. 👍 Genesis is an essential part of the Bible and the history in it central to the gospel. Your notion that science and scripture must not be mixed is to be ignored. 👍👍👍

@Idolater -- You subscribe to a global flood, right?

Sounds like a platitude. Is there some takeaway? You do know that soil can be fertile even after having all of the life boiled out of it, right? It's not important. I read your explanation of what you believe a bit more and my response doesn't really apply. :) Why do you believe this? There...

Can I ask what the point of your comment was? You started it off with "but," which makes it sound like you disagree with something. Did God make the cake in the oven? The point of that question being, yes, we could attribute all matter to being ultimately a part of creation, but there's no way...

Spike Psarris