Once again, a declarative statement is not an argument.
You haven't even established a contact between your declarations (they would be premises if they were proven) and your "conclusions."
There is some imaginary substance to connect your declarative statements and conclusion - they are logical fallacies.
Translate: I can't refute it.
Once again, all refutation of
post #745 requires is demonstration from their sources--nature and Rom 1:18-32, that the declarations are incorrect.
Absent that refutation, the statements stand as accurate representation of their
sources--nature and Rom 1:18-32;
and/or
all refutation requires is demonstration that the conclusions, drawn from the accurate (because unrefuted) representations of their sources, are incorrect.
Absent that refutation, the
conclusions drawn from the accurate representations are correct.
In the absence of refutation, my
post #745 on the Biblical approach to human life beginning at conception is unrefuted.
The Bible is the given parameter of this thread, and its approach to conception and human life is what is to be shown.
And my presentation of the Biblical approach to that issue is yet to be refuted.
The "imaginary substance," which "connects" the declarative statements to the conclusions, is obvious to the intellectually honest; i.e.,
It is the same "imaginary substance" which "connected" the NT's conclusion regarding the pagans' divine condemnation
to the pagans' non-acceptance of the eternal, divine, righteous God of the universe.
That "connective" "imaginary substance" is the divine authority of the natural revelation in creation.
