(March 28, 2013 at 11:43 am)catfish Wrote: Nope, you're either an idiot or a liar. I tend to think most are just idiots, but since you said this not more that a few minutes ago and are now denying it, I gotta stop giving you the benefit of the doubt.

One can hold a position on a fictional character without wanting that fictional character to be real and to possess that position itself, catfish. I think Voldemort is pretty immoral too, it doesn't follow that I think Voldemort is real and that I want him to be immoral, I'm just making a judgment based on his actions as depicted in the fiction.

Dude, seriously?
Wouldn't be easier to admit you used the wrong wording than keeping up this facade?

(March 28, 2013 at 11:53 am)catfish Wrote: Dude, seriously?
Wouldn't be easier to admit you used the wrong wording than keeping up this facade?

I don't think I used the wrong wording. I think you've misunderstood my post.

I've admitted my errors on here, before, I'm not afraid to do that.

(March 28, 2013 at 11:55 am)CleanShavenJesus Wrote:

(March 28, 2013 at 11:53 am)catfish Wrote: Dude, seriously?
Wouldn't be easier to admit you used the wrong wording than keeping up this facade?

I don't think I used the wrong wording. I think you've misunderstood my post.

I've admitted my errors on here, before, I'm not afraid to do that.

In one sentence you assert that every person makes god conform to what they want. In another you assert that you only "interpret" it the way it's written.

Which one is a true statement or how the fuck could they both be true?

(March 28, 2013 at 12:00 pm)catfish Wrote: In one sentence you assert that every person makes god conform to what they want. In another you assert that you only "interpret" it the way it's written.

Which one is a true statement or how the fuck could they both be true?

He could just want to interpret it so god conforms to the way he's written in the text. That doesn't eliminate subjectivity- after all, one can set out to accomplish something and still have that be tainted by personal preferences and such- which, of course, is another reason why those two statements aren't mutually exclusive.

(March 28, 2013 at 12:03 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(March 28, 2013 at 12:00 pm)catfish Wrote: In one sentence you assert that every person makes god conform to what they want. In another you assert that you only "interpret" it the way it's written.

Which one is a true statement or how the fuck could they both be true?

He could just want to interpret it so god conforms to the way he's written in the text. That doesn't eliminate subjectivity- after all, one can set out to accomplish something and still have that be tainted by personal preferences and such- which, of course, is another reason why those two statements aren't mutually exclusive.

Yet another amazingly cogent rebuttal, catfish. At least you're getting more concise/easier to ignore. I like that you're beginning to realize how little mental effort your posts are actually worth.

But you asked, and I answered. Care to tell me what the actual issue is with my response, or will you just scoff again?

(March 28, 2013 at 12:05 pm)catfish Wrote:

(March 28, 2013 at 12:03 pm)Esquilax Wrote: He could just want to interpret it so god conforms to the way he's written in the text. That doesn't eliminate subjectivity- after all, one can set out to accomplish something and still have that be tainted by personal preferences and such- which, of course, is another reason why those two statements aren't mutually exclusive.

I was about to amend my original post because I thought perhaps I did word it wrong, but...no, I didn't. It still makes sense. What Esquilax said also makes sense. What aren't you understanding?

(March 28, 2013 at 12:11 pm)Esquilax Wrote: Yet another amazingly cogent rebuttal, catfish. At least you're getting more concise/easier to ignore. I like that you're beginning to realize how little mental effort your posts are actually worth.

But you asked, and I answered. Care to tell me what the actual issue is with my response, or will you just scoff again?

Seriously man, you be so silly sometimes. Pay close attention to what you wrote (bolded by me).

Quote:He could just want to interpret it so god conforms to the way he's written in the text. That doesn't eliminate subjectivity- after all, one can set out to accomplish something and still have that be tainted by personal preferences and such- which, of course, is another reason why those two statements aren't mutually exclusive.

So you acknowledge that he interprets it with his own bias.

(March 28, 2013 at 11:51 am)Esquilax Wrote: One can hold a position on a fictional character without wanting that fictional character to be real and to possess that position itself, catfish. I think Voldemort is pretty immoral too, it doesn't follow that I think Voldemort is real and that I want him to be immoral, I'm just making a judgment based on his actions as depicted in the fiction.

So let's make a judgment of God as he is depicted in the Bible. God sends his son Jesus to suffer and die for our sins, so that we may live forever. How do you (or other atheists here) make sense of this behavior?