Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kowalski
So he has indeed conceded this point. Though even had he not, as Flake hasn't, you can't simply demand it as a condition for the continuance of the discussion. You first need to prove it in argument.
|
Oh I see, apologies to Tom, i didn’t follow.
I was arguing that theological questions are secondary to my point. I.e. by analogy, there is no point discussing whether apples and oranges taste sweet if you believe that apples and oranges have been scientifically disproved to exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flake
The general definition of "the supernatural being conceived as the perfect and omnipotent and omniscient originator and ruler of the universe" is disproved by science.
|
I still don’t understand how?
Apologies if I’ve missed this too, maybe the moderator can clarify? (Wake up!!)