Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: GourmetDan

The church supported the most supported theory of the time. Better than those anti-science folks who refuse to budge in what they think no matter the evidence.


408 posted on 06/29/2008 7:43:43 PM PDT by Bogey78O (Don't call them jihadis. Call them irhabis. Tick them off, don't entertain their delusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 400 | View Replies ]


To: Bogey78O
"The church supported the most supported theory of the time."

Which makes 'the church' nothing but an echo of the prevailing opinion of men. IOW, nothing at all.

"Better than those anti-science folks who refuse to budge in what they think no matter the evidence."

You are confused. The evidence is all the same. There is no evidence that proves anything either way. It is all in the interpretation of the evidence and that is a function of 'a priori' assumptions. Those who philosophically assume naturalism 'a priori' have 'natural' theories.

I think that not understanding that point is the root of your problem.

428 posted on 06/30/2008 1:37:51 PM PDT by GourmetDan (Eccl 10:2 - The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 408 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson