Quote:
Originally Posted by Didymos Thomas  Those interviewed for the book were mostly philosophy and theology scholars, and none of those interviewed oppose ID.
It's not like we're stuck between random chance or ID. More importantly, throwing God out as some metaphysical goop that fills all crevices as yet untouched by science doesn't hold much water.
And outside of the Discovery Institute, ID is not taken seriously.
Logical necessities are not necessities of reality.
I think the problem is rooted in the mistaken attempt to prove God. It's impossible and misses the point. |
And so w/ attempts to disprove God. Shall we discuss something more interesting, like the nature of time, or whether machines can think, or shall we keep spinning our wheels?
Btw, I don't understand your last quote; are you saying that reality doesn't obey logic?
Thank you for introducing me to the other side of the endless debate over God's existence; you have let me exercise my philosophical muscles and have increased my faith in God, for I now know that His existence is important enough to be debated and all worthwhile theories have a degree of opposition.