Search results

Again, I shall keep stating (to my eventual frustration) that I have not at all claimed God does not exist as a matter of fact. If you are to question the consistency of my logic then you should suppose, for such purposes, that subjective/wishful interpretations of entirely natural phenomena...

Yes, I agree with you. I think I may have pointed that out in this thread; when the only way to make your Holy Book seem relevant in the modern day and not barbaric and violent is to just work out excuses to ignore parts of it outright without consideration of its implications, then there is...

Well such events were entirely within Catholic precedent and had been done before. I would agree with you that the Bible hardly extends to covering up accusations of paedophilia, however. Actually I referred to a part of the Old Testament, but yes the paragraph in Romans is interesting too...

If I am claiming more that I ought, then anyone claiming that God exists is claiming far more than they ought, anyone that claims they know about his workings and interactions with our world even more so, and anyone that claims that the overwhelming majority of what we need to know is contained...

I wasn't necessarily pointing to that as an example, but rather the propagation of such bigotry and inequality as the Catholic church's continual homophobic discourse. I would, however, posit that any church that doesn't propagate such bigotry is not really following the Bible on such issues...

Um, no. The Pope's bigoted aversion to homosexuality is actually entierly scripturally-based. People are good people because of their nature, and good religious people have to ignore an extra-large amount of evil present in their ideology of the world in order to do so; people that do bad and...

Citation needed?

He's a bumbling idiot.

Gay marriage insidious and dangerous: Pope Sigh ... barbarism, hypocrisy and medieval idiocy at its finest. :)

I think we're best off leaving this point. It's not one that I find to be most important as far as theism goes and I even suggested a reasonable middle ground that I would argue in my previous post. If you'd like to move on there are some posts on the nature of God and natural evil that you've...

Interesting. Again, I find the position extremely semantic and an attempt to find a distinction where I don't see there to be one on the large scale. Statements such as this, however: It is fallacious to infer that x will necessarily happen. It simply will happen. It is entirely possible for...

No it's not, it's entirely circular and self-referential.

No, I'm not. I'll try and clarify here; I'm not stating that God doesn't exist as a matter of fact. I am stating that there is no objective evidence that God exists. This is acknowledged by both of us. From there, I am saying that it is not unreasonable to believe he probably doesn't exist, as...

Sure. I'll put my opening points on the subject at the end of this post after rounding off the opening comments. I'd be happy to. My opinion of the whole idea, however, is that if you believe in something in the first place, it is entirely possible that you can find things in nature that...

Sure, that's fine. I don't really need any more than that to point out the logical flaws, but now that we've established our rules, my opening point on this will have to wait until a bit later tonight, for I'm short on time. Hate is a strong word. I find that there is no good reason to find...

Flynn? Ah fuck ...

Well as I said, most logical problems with the idea of a creator quickly fade away when you remove them from religion. That is to say that the religious idea of a God is logically inconsistent, scientifically implausible and historically inaccurate. Yet a more vague deistic God is really the...

Like I say, you cannot take any event "in isolation", and this is why defining your terms is important. However there is a reason that I said that this is not one of the most severe problems with ideas of God, and that is because it is conceivable that, if God is omniscient, that he knows that...

Every event is a culmination of the cause and effects of other events, each and every one of which God knows "will" happen. You can't delineate these two concepts if you admit that God knows everything that will happen. For these events that God knows "will" happen to occur, other events that he...

Yet the fact that it "will" come to pass implies that it "must", or any such knowledge of what "will" come to pass is rendered meaningless. Though there are far more severe logical problems with the idea of a creator, specifically a religious one, than determinism.