Originally posted by Kbertsche
View Post
So I made it extremely clear what claim I thought you had no evidence for: the claim was clause 2. You then responded by saying that you had evidence:
Originally posted by Kbertsche
View Post
but which you repeatedly avoid.
I have presented evidence for this, which you have not responded to.
You have not presented any good evidence for your claims (only other folks making the same unevidenced claims).
The second clause reflects my own belief and interpretation. It is a follow-on to the first clause.
Originally posted by Kbertsche
View Post
There is no point in considering or discussing this until we have discussed the first clause.
I will not discuss this with you until we have thoroughly discussed the main question that you first raised and that we disagree on: Is Christianity "natural" or "unnatural"?.
I claim that "Christian theology is at least as "unnatural" as science." I have presented evidence for this. Where is your counter-evidence against this? (Not counter claims, not counter references, but counter evidence!)
Anyway, here's another summary for you. Hopefully it helps this time:
Originally posted by Jichard
View Post
Comment