happydolphin on 18 December 2012
| dsgrue3 said:
lol, your definition for existence was A exists because B requires it to exist. You said A does not have to exist for B to exist and then proceeded to claim that A exists. You realize evolution does not require God, right? |
@bold. I realize that, and it wasn't in my logic.
It's not part of my definition, it was a supporting clause. It's not required, but if and when B depends on A, then yes this comes into effect. Not the case for the God clause I'm afraid.
