[geocentrism] Re: Question begging
- From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 15:11:53 -0700 (PDT)
Me in blue
Allen is trying to co-erce Paul to accept his word, as the word of God, as an
acceptable proof that this world is static, without any valid scientific reason
to support this position...No, only that there is NO or NONE Scientific or
logically valid reason(s) for any other view regardless of whether or not or
which one you think it is true..
Not even a reasonable theory, because Allen presumes that Gods word is all
that is needed to support the illusion he has in front of his eyes.
The question of what is and is not a "illusion" is the one that keeps getting
begged when you assert any view other then WYSIWYG without a valid evidence to
that effect ..which as I have stated before can only come from one?s
imagination or some other WYSIWYG experience....hint: a WYSIWYG must be
relevant before it can invalidate not after.......
Isn't that true Allen? And that will not work.. God had to send Ananias to
take the scales from Pauls eyes before he was able to SEE ...."who rose up and
was baptised, and received the Holy Ghost."
1.I don?t have a problem with scripture as proof but I am showing that there
is "reason" with or without it.....same holds true for the existence of
God...but knowledge of existiace of God as well as GC itself will not save
anyone from hell.....
2. Before proof of the GC cosmos can be viewed by folk of the HC/AC
persuasion they must first understand that the HC/AC view is not even a
logically plausible path to start to argue from or even pursue since by its
very "logical" constructs it is unprovable by virtue of the fact it attempts to
use what no one has in reality to ascertain what reality truly is.
philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: "But the reality is a
presumption in both cases".
The reality is fixed, but the perception of that reality by humans
is variable ( correct or incorrect ).
Bernie
Yep.. I should have said that what they think or call their reality based on
what each of them can see or observe or measure, is a presumption in both
cases, even if one of them is lucky enough to be true.
Now following on, even though My God is real and he tells me that my world is
static, this cannot be accepted scientifically by a Paul who has no God, as he
is also confronted by the man on B who tells him the exact same thing that it
is his world that is static, and that A's God is false.
Allen is trying to co-erce Paul to accept his word, as the word of God, as an
acceptable proof that this world is static, without any valid scientific reason
to support this position. Not even a reasonable theory, because Allen presumes
that Gods word is all that is needed to support the illusion he has in front of
his eyes.
Isn't that true Allen? And that will not work.. God had to send Ananias to
take the scales from Pauls eyes before he was able to SEE ...."who rose up and
was baptised, and received the Holy Ghost."
Philip.
Other related posts:
