To: highball
But when it comes to this particular dogma, many are happy to adopt it for themselves.Isn't it just a tad "dogmatic" to assert that God is not, and cannot be, the object or subject of science?
To: Fester Chugabrew
Isn't it just a tad "dogmatic" to assert that God is not, and cannot be, the object or subject of science? No.
355 posted on
12/20/2005 10:04:30 AM PST by
js1138
(Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
To: Fester Chugabrew
Isn't it just a tad "dogmatic" to assert that God is not, and cannot be, the object or subject of science? No more than it's dogmatic to assert that a polygon with 5 sides isn't a square. ID could be 100% correct, and it still wouldn't be scientific. If you like, you can take this as an illustration of the limitations of science.
To: Fester Chugabrew
Isn't it just a tad "dogmatic" to assert that God is not, and cannot be, the object or subject of science? LOL. Tell you what, go invent a 'god-meter', and then get back to us.
To: Fester Chugabrew
"Isn't it just a tad "dogmatic" to assert that God is not, and cannot be, the object or subject of science?"
Come up with a falsifiable test for the presence or non-presence of God.
687 posted on
12/20/2005 12:04:26 PM PST by
BeHoldAPaleHorse
(MORE COWBELL! MORE COWBELL! (CLANK-CLANK-CLANK))
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson