I disagree that it is logically impossible, you assert that it is. You can only claim this by (falsely in my view) by assigning an attribute to a god. God therefore sits at the heart of the premise about his own attributes, which stretches credulity to breaking point.
I bet my knowledge is very incomplete on this and many others subjects. I also realise you do not find the Jesus thing contradictory. Your view is one of a wide spectrum held by xtian theists. Others clearly assert that Jesus was a god and that Jesus' crucification was deicide (infact pogroms were built on this following Easter services in Eastern Europe). The problem for you is that there isn't great data for your position and poor data for other positions, they are all equally poor. I feel justified in my claims an countering your rebuttal as such.
Doing evil IS NOT logically impossible, if you argue that it is because of gods nature then you have to explain why that god can seemingly break out of other parts of his nature at a whim. I understand your position on it, but your position is no stronger or weaker than any others based on the evidence. We haven't even gone at the evidence yet. But when you turn to the evidence (such that it is): the problem of evil; of innocent suffering and of the scripture. It is ALL stacked on one side of the debate, in that a god clearly can allow / do evil things (by most subjective views). In other words in order to believe this concept, you have to ignore / spin the only evidence, and then ground impossible attributes at the centre of the god myth in xtianity. Not very convincing, at least for me.
I bet my knowledge is very incomplete on this and many others subjects. I also realise you do not find the Jesus thing contradictory. Your view is one of a wide spectrum held by xtian theists. Others clearly assert that Jesus was a god and that Jesus' crucification was deicide (infact pogroms were built on this following Easter services in Eastern Europe). The problem for you is that there isn't great data for your position and poor data for other positions, they are all equally poor. I feel justified in my claims an countering your rebuttal as such.
Doing evil IS NOT logically impossible, if you argue that it is because of gods nature then you have to explain why that god can seemingly break out of other parts of his nature at a whim. I understand your position on it, but your position is no stronger or weaker than any others based on the evidence. We haven't even gone at the evidence yet. But when you turn to the evidence (such that it is): the problem of evil; of innocent suffering and of the scripture. It is ALL stacked on one side of the debate, in that a god clearly can allow / do evil things (by most subjective views). In other words in order to believe this concept, you have to ignore / spin the only evidence, and then ground impossible attributes at the centre of the god myth in xtianity. Not very convincing, at least for me.
"I still say a church steeple with a lightning rod on top shows a lack of confidence"...Doug McLeod.
