(September 19, 2013 at 12:47 pm)John V Wrote: It would be more accurate to say that I'm attacking the notion that god is objectively imperfect.

Regardless, a criteria for what constitutes perfection must be ascertained. What criteria should we use to judge god?

(September 19, 2013 at 1:01 pm)max-greece Wrote: We have established logically that God is not perfect.

Uh, Sparky, could you quit speaking for me?

Should be: you have asserted that God is not perfect by judging him according to rules set for sinful man. I've repeatedly pointed out this apples-and-oranges mistake.

(September 19, 2013 at 1:02 pm)John V Wrote:

(September 19, 2013 at 12:58 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Which one?

Considering that this is the Christianity forum...

Why don't you just post this and be done with it:

No, you have nothing to add. You simply are getting pissed that I won't travel down your Yellow Brick Road.

All god claims are naked assertions. All comic books of religion are self serving circular reasoning. You want your god to be real, but no one here is fooled by any elaborate tripe you may post. I simply cut to the chase. If others want to dance with you, they can. I don't.

"God exists"
"Allah exists"
"Yahweh exists"
"Vishnu exists"
"Apollo exists"
"Ouija boards work"

ALL the same crap which works by swallowing first.

(September 19, 2013 at 1:02 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: And what methodology did he use?

You haven't been around long or been particularly impressive - i.e. you haven't been afforded the luxury of playing garden path. Get to the point, if you have one.

Quote: I've repeatedly pointed out this apples-and-oranges mistake.

And we have repeatedly dismissed it for the apologetic bullshit that it is.

(September 19, 2013 at 1:09 pm)Brian37 Wrote: No, you have nothing to add. You simply are getting pissed that I won't travel down your Yellow Brick Road.

No, I'm simply amused that you tried to sit down at the grown-up's table. Back to the card table, Sonny. Talk about crappy music.

(September 19, 2013 at 1:11 pm)John V Wrote:

(September 19, 2013 at 1:02 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: And what methodology did he use?

You haven't been around long or been particularly impressive - i.e. you haven't been afforded the luxury of playing garden path. Get to the point, if you have one.

We did.

You like what you believe. You want your god to be real. But the reality is that he does not exist, he is a product of human imagination. We cant dumb it down anymore for you than that.

(September 19, 2013 at 1:11 pm)John V Wrote:

(September 19, 2013 at 1:02 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: And what methodology did he use?

You haven't been around long or been particularly impressive - i.e. you haven't been afforded the luxury of playing garden path. Get to the point, if you have one.

Well let's see god is perfect Because he does not sin. He determined what is and is not sin and then did not share his Methodology. Then how can we know he didn't simply make it up? If he simply made up the standard by which he is to judged perfect then of he course he is perfect, you or I would be perfect too if we used that method.

(September 19, 2013 at 1:21 pm)John V Wrote:

(September 19, 2013 at 1:09 pm)Brian37 Wrote: No, you have nothing to add. You simply are getting pissed that I won't travel down your Yellow Brick Road.

No, I'm simply amused that you tried to sit down at the grown-up's table. Back to the card table, Sonny. Talk about crappy music.

Said the person with an invisible friend. It is understandable when kids make up and have invisible friends, but you look silly as an adult having one.

(September 19, 2013 at 1:21 pm)John V Wrote:

(September 19, 2013 at 1:09 pm)Brian37 Wrote: No, you have nothing to add. You simply are getting pissed that I won't travel down your Yellow Brick Road.

No, I'm simply amused that you tried to sit down at the grown-up's table. Back to the card table, Sonny. Talk about crappy music.

And you want people to take you seriously when you talk to atheists on an atheist forum in this manner. You don't like that people like Brian and Min are bringing this argument back to the root problem: that is, your belief in an invisible sky daddy. Your argument over whether or not he's perfect should be completely moot because you can't first prove if he's even there.