256
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 126:
Line 126: + + + + + + +
Talk:Counterexamples to Relativity (view source)
Revision as of 15:41, January 6, 2010
, 15:41, January 6, 2010→Counterexample 9 (Jesus action-at-a-distance): Testing scientific hypotheses using God's miracles or signs seems to be odd!
:::::::How about using "the fact" of simple logic and the power of your ''own'' mind?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:27, 6 January 2010 (EST)
:::::::How about using "the fact" of simple logic and the power of your ''own'' mind?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:27, 6 January 2010 (EST)
::::::::To make it as clear as possible in my own words:
::::::::*I won't restrict God by laws which men made or observed. Can I understand God's ways? Can I expect God to act the way I think to be logical? That would be [[hubris]].
::::::::*Testing scientific hypotheses using God's miracles or signs seems to be odd!
::::::::But which part of Thomas Aquinas's definition of miraculous events didn't you like? Granted, he had a slightly other view of the ''capacity of nature'' than we have today, but his line of reasoning was as valid in the 15th century as it is today! I hoped that his definition would be more ''helpful'' than that of David Hume.
::::::::[[User:FrankC|FrankC aka ComedyFan]] 10:41, 6 January 2010 (EST)