(January 19, 2016 at 6:56 am)MrNoMorePropaganda Wrote: Not sure if this has been mentioned already: But the thing is, unless they are quoting the religious texts, the apologists are using arguments that anyone of any religion can use. Indeed, WLC's favourite Kalaam was originally a Muhamnadan argument.
Yeah, that never seems to bother people. I believe it's called the "broken compass" fallacy, because the conclusion gives you no indication of where to go next. "Therefor Jesus" is as good as "Therefor Pyro Warrior VII".
Kalam really is bollocks. A cause is not (necessarily) an intelligence, an intelligence is not a god, and a god is not a specific God. Three non sequiturs required, even after all the fallacies already in the argument.
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum