(October 6, 2026 at 1:34 am)Sheldon Wrote:

(October 5, 2026 at 4:56 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: If the argument that god does bad things was irrelevant to saint Tommy he probably wouldn’t have spent so much time falling all over himself blaming the victims.  

I’m beginning to doubt that you e actually read the guys you’re always yammering about Bel……

The lack of even a single salient quote, the removal of all context from my post, it certainly looked like another lame pretentious attempt to name drop, he might as well be citing Harry Potter or The Gruffalo. 

In the film A Fish Called Wanda Kev Cline's character Otto, is a knuckle dragging thug, whose pretentions extend to philosophy, when Jamie Lee Curtis calls him an ape, he is outraged and says "Apes don't read Nietzsche" she replies Yes, they do Otto, they just don't understand it".

I wonder if Bel knows that Aristotle was not Belgian.

Boru

(October 5, 2026 at 9:22 am)Sheldon Wrote:

(October 5, 2026 at 6:29 am)Belacqua Wrote: Blah blah blah Aristotle blah blah blah..

Another speech that doesn't address my post at all, and appears to be nothing more than yet another attempt at posturing, it just chases irrelevant straw men, by removing almost the entirety of my post, and all context. I warned you my next rebuff would be less polite, so please leave me the fuck alone you showboating clown.

Nearly all of the criticisms made on this thread about the Christian God apply to the anthropomorphic tyrant that the sola scriptura literalist Christians believe in. In fact, nearly all of the criticisms made on this forum are that way.

I brought up Classical Theology because most of these criticisms do not apply to that school of Christian thought. For example, according to those thinkers, we are not "slaves" to God, any more than we are "slaves" to the laws of nature, to the passing of time, and that kind of thing.

I have been told that No True Christian believes in Classical Theology, and that they are all sola scriptura literalists. But that's not true. None of the well-known theologians from history were sola scriptura literalists. None of the modern philosophers who are atheist but talk about how Christianity has affected Western thought write of the literalist God. If Rowan Williams, for example, were posting on this forum, he would simply say that the criticisms made against this anthropomorphic God do not apply to the religion that he believes in. 

But I understand that you're not interested in having a conversation about theology, or the different kinds of beliefs that Christians may have. I won't bring it up to you again, and I hope you enjoy your conversations here on other topics.

(October 6, 2026 at 7:08 am)Belacqua Wrote:

(October 5, 2026 at 9:22 am)Sheldon Wrote: Another speech that doesn't address my post at all, and appears to be nothing more than yet another attempt at posturing, it just chases irrelevant straw men, by removing almost the entirety of my post, and all context. I warned you my next rebuff would be less polite, so please leave me the fuck alone you showboating clown.

Nearly all of 

...my post was deleted by you, all context was removed, and this is not the first time, I have zero interest in talking to anyone that dishonest, whose only motive is showboating.

(October 6, 2026 at 7:08 am)Belacqua Wrote:

(October 5, 2026 at 9:22 am)Sheldon Wrote: Another speech that doesn't address my post at all, and appears to be nothing more than yet another attempt at posturing, it just chases irrelevant straw men, by removing almost the entirety of my post, and all context. I warned you my next rebuff would be less polite, so please leave me the fuck alone you showboating clown.

Nearly all of the criticisms made on this thread about the Christian God apply to the anthropomorphic tyrant that the sola scriptura literalist Christians believe in. In fact, nearly all of the criticisms made on this forum are that way.

I brought up Classical Theology because most of these criticisms do not apply to that school of Christian thought. For example, according to those thinkers, we are not "slaves" to God, any more than we are "slaves" to the laws of nature, to the passing of time, and that kind of thing.

I have been told that No True Christian believes in Classical Theology, and that they are all sola scriptura literalists. But that's not true. None of the well-known theologians from history were sola scriptura literalists. None of the modern philosophers who are atheist but talk about how Christianity has affected Western thought write of the literalist God. If Rowan Williams, for example, were posting on this forum, he would simply say that the criticisms made against this anthropomorphic God do not apply to the religion that he believes in. 

But I understand that you're not interested in having a conversation about theology, or the different kinds of beliefs that Christians may have. I won't bring it up to you again, and I hope you enjoy your conversations here on other topics.

This would be relevant if more modern Christians knew or cared about Classical Theology. But the fact is that the overwhelmingly vast majority of present-day Christians wouldn’t recognize an Aristotelian or Aquinian argument if it strolled up and kicked them in the teeth.

What you’re doing is the same as rejecting a bad review of a martial arts movie on the basis  that the review ignores the political realities of the Tokugawa Shogunate.

Boru

(October 6, 2026 at 7:08 am)Belacqua Wrote:

(October 5, 2026 at 9:22 am)Sheldon Wrote: Another speech that doesn't address my post at all, and appears to be nothing more than yet another attempt at posturing, it just chases irrelevant straw men, by removing almost the entirety of my post, and all context. I warned you my next rebuff would be less polite, so please leave me the fuck alone you showboating clown.

I understand that you're not interested in having a conversation about theology, 

That's a rather cowardly lie, but I see that hijacking threads to showboat, and then indulge in passive aggressive trolling, is all you're really interested in.

Oh good lord. Asking about the shoddiest assumption in an argument does no such thing. That is, after all, the main criticism of the argument in academic philosophy.

Bel coming in and singing that same old song...color me surprised.

Well now I'm just an uneducated dullard, but why I wonder am I not surprised that religious texts that do not reflect objective reality and often seem to contradict it, are then assumed to carry some hidden esoteric message by those whose primary goal is to bend everything to their belief, rather bending their beliefs to the facts? It's a puzzle alright, if only I had the education and intellect to work it out. 

Perhaps it is again my lack of intellect and education, but I am also left wondering why a deity that supposedly (according to some) possesses limitless knowledge to create a message, and limitless power to communicate it, and wants nothing more than us to acknowledge its existence, would deal in cryptic allegory at all, let alone myths that a mere few hundred years of scientific endeavour by one species of great ape, shows in many cases to be fundamentally at odds with the facts?

I guess I'll never have the intellect to grasp these deep esoteric truths some others can brandish around so casually with pride, I do like jokes though, like the one that says if every philosopher in the world were laid end to end.....they still couldn't reach a decision. FWIW doesn't William Lane Craig have a PhD in philosophy? I mean his genius as an apologist must be off the scale right, why don't we just listen to what he says on the subjective of religion and theistic belief?

Just for the record, even accepting the bible is allegory, this doesn't help support the idea a deity exists for me, my doubts remain. It seems obvious, but even if a story were to carry profound moral, psychological, or existential value, it could do so without mapping onto any supernatural reality. of course certain books lose something if you strip away the intended allegory of the authors, people would be pointing and laughing at Harry Potter, instead of dressing up like the characters for fun, this does not of course suggest anything claimed in the books is real. Unlike people who claim the bible is meant as allegory, and yet depicts a real deity.