(March 20, 2011 at 11:08 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Well check out the orthodox definitions of God. It's not that there is poor data, there's plenty. There are just variations held by people of different beliefs. ie not orthodox Christian. You counter my rebuttal from a position of lack of knowledge of the subject. I can hardly take that seriously.In terms of taking things seriously, I am not the one with unjustified beliefs, but hey I'll happily admit to xtian theological ignorance. Theology is spin by any other name, its justifying the unjustifiable and a hermetically sealed debate between nodding and winking professor types congratulating themselves on their theist conceptions and incredulous argumentation. If you take that seriously you need someone elses head examining. It seems to me if a job isn't worth doing, it isn't worth doing well; I'll happily stay away from their impossible god debates. I am perfectly justified on judging religion on its foundational texts, pronouncements of its leaders and its post debate declarations of the impossible and contradictory god it portrays. Tiwst and turn as mush as you like....oh and on your second point....
That God allows suffering does not equate to God causing suffering. The spin on the evidence is on the side of those against the basis of our concept of God, when addressing orthodox Christianity. Until you are able to prove that your challenge is valid, then you cannot assert it.
....you are wrong. It exactly equates. If you have:
- no knowledge, nor power to prevent an incident then you are blameless,
- some knowledge/power you can carry some blame, and it increases linearly until....
- ....total knowledge/power, guess what, total blame
"I still say a church steeple with a lightning rod on top shows a lack of confidence"...Doug McLeod.
