(November 7, 2011 at 4:49 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Again you are failing by trying to dismiss something on grounds of attributes it cannot by definition posess Cpn.I have made a very clear argument which you haven't dismantled. You seem to be trying to project the weakness of your own position back onto me.
Of course God refers to something in particular, or we couldn't call God God. Any Christian will have a very firm understanding of who God is and can corroborate that with every other Christian, and even the discerning non Christian who cares to confront the theology thoroughly.
So as usual I find your root objection to lack substance.
If god is something in particular you will be able to describe gods primary attribute positively. You have failed to do that. Your responses have so far just begged the question (which you haven't denied) and so stand on that same shaky ground I described.
It is you who are dismissing an argument and ignoring the points made.
As ususal there is wolly thinking which you like to dress up as crystalline and inviable. You then accuse people of not understanding the points you are making and of ignoring them. You are merely adopting the tactic of the Emporers New Clothes. I am not going to stand back in awe at gasp at the wonder of your invisible rejoinder. I need you to answer for theism, in the terms I have outlined, if you cannot do that, then fine just admit it.
"I still say a church steeple with a lightning rod on top shows a lack of confidence"...Doug McLeod.
