If I recall correctly, Doug Geivett was in conversation with Flew and formed a budding relationship during my time at Talbot. He was somewhat instrumental in helping Flew move toward theism.
Thank you for that interesting discussion. Also note: axioms are also beyond falsification. We don't (and can't) prove the axioms of any system of derivation because there is nothing more basic that can be used to prove the axioms. We use the axioms to derive things and not the other way around. So the axioms themselves are unprovable and hence unfalsifiable, but we still assert the axioms in order to use the system. And God can be considered to be an axiom of reality since God is supposed to be the Creator of all that exists. From God all things in reality derive their existence, and not the other way around. So there is no specific evidence that proves God exists since he is the axiom of reality.
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
If I recall correctly, Doug Geivett was in conversation with Flew and formed a budding relationship during my time at Talbot. He was somewhat instrumental in helping Flew move toward theism.
Thank you for that interesting discussion. Also note: axioms are also beyond falsification. We don't (and can't) prove the axioms of any system of derivation because there is nothing more basic that can be used to prove the axioms. We use the axioms to derive things and not the other way around. So the axioms themselves are unprovable and hence unfalsifiable, but we still assert the axioms in order to use the system. And God can be considered to be an axiom of reality since God is supposed to be the Creator of all that exists. From God all things in reality derive their existence, and not the other way around. So there is no specific evidence that proves God exists since he is the axiom of reality.