Block, SkipCaptcha
8,517
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 84:
Line 84: +
Debate: If not naturalism, how do we decide which supernatural explanation is correct? (view source)
Revision as of 22:15, November 20, 2008
, 22:15, November 20, 2008cat
An event that is truly supernatural could not be used to prove the existance of a specific God. To prove it was a supernatural event would mean to falsify EVERY natural explanation and would therefore require knowing everything including the knowledge that there is nothing left to know.
An event that is truly supernatural could not be used to prove the existance of a specific God. To prove it was a supernatural event would mean to falsify EVERY natural explanation and would therefore require knowing everything including the knowledge that there is nothing left to know.
Religions that tolerate other religions are admitting that they may be wrong and the God they worship might be a fake. [[User:Markr|Markr]] 12:26, 5 October 2008 (EDT)
Religions that tolerate other religions are admitting that they may be wrong and the God they worship might be a fake. [[User:Markr|Markr]] 12:26, 5 October 2008 (EDT)
[[Category:Conservapedia Debates]]