 | | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism —David Eaton
|
| | | (...) Not in the least. You're taking people's word for it. "That's a picture of the earth from a satellite. Here's Brazil." Proof? Only if you *believe* the person. And that's faith-- at least in my book. Faith in that person's credibility, and (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism —Tom Stangl
|
| | | | (...) You can log in on a website and access sat photos. Ones detailed enough to identify your own car in a parking lot. Those satellites can then pick out cars in Brazil. If you have the infinite time, you can step your way from wherever you live (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism —David Eaton
|
| | | | (...) Aha! EXACTLY the point. "Proof enough for YOU" != "Proof". Right? Becuase if I say God exists because I've had "Proof enough for ME", you'd argue that I was wrong, I assume. But back to Brazil-- You'd probably concede (I hope) that if there (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | (...) That IS exactly what you are trying to say. You are welcome to correct me, but then explain what you are trying to do, since your initial point was that science is based on faith (at some point) and religion is based on faith, so they aren't (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Perceptions and Reality (was Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism) —David Eaton
|
| | | | (...) The inherent difference in the two ('science' vs. 'religion') is that for you, me, and I would argue, most, if not all humans, 'science' proves itself more worthy of faith. I.E. to argue against true 'science' is to look absurd, but to argue (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
