Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
You obviously. There is a big difference between the observation that everything that we see appears to have a natural cause and claiming that that is the only possible answer. Naturalism is actually the former. It is a belief due to observation, it is not an "assumption". You made a incredibly incorrect false accusation and now you won't fess up to it.ah, who won't let themselves see?....
If possible, please try to see what I wrote in the last few posts to you (last 3 for instance) without thinking you already know what they say.
I've tried to say it about 4 ways now, and you've still not even recognizing what I'm saying. Over and over I've said versions of the "text" of "the common bible" -- "predicted" on the "bible".
Basically you can't analyze arithmetic with the assumption that number doesn't exist. You can't analyze something in the bible using an premise that God as in the bible doesn't exist, such as the premise that nothing unnatural can happen, etc.
It's not a logical process of analysis with a premise that denies the very subject being discussed.
I have answered your questions, even though you have been rather rude from the start. And in case you did not know strawman arguments are always rude. You have avoided my questions when you appear to know that they will refute your stance. Why is that?