(July 1, 2016 at 9:30 pm)Veritas_Vincit Wrote: Just to clarify:
[1] I disagree that the purpose of the universe is to choose God. I am not even remotely convinced there is a God, but even if there was I think this choosing him thing is a stupid idea.
I disagree that the flat earth believer analogy is bad - it illustrates the point I was making which is that just because lots of people believe something it doesn't mean they're right, and they are often wrong. It's a good analogy.
don't give a shit how many people believe in God, I only care why, and from what I've heard so far I think they are mistaken.
[2] I agree there is 'evidence' for God, but I find it all to be bad evidence, and I find the notion does not meet its burden of proof.
[3] I disagree that a God can be the source of morality. I don't believe there is a god, but morality is far better explained by evolution by natural selection.
[4] I disagree with your scriptural interpretation of what Jesus said concerning the Old Testament and I have explained why. As for "You have been told elsewhere you are wrong." Yes, but not convinced in the slightest, so you can shove it up your arse.
[5] I disagree with your interpretation of slavery in the Bible. I think your apologetics for it are weak and unfounded.
[6] BUT - I can see that nothing I say is going to make you change your mind, that's not why you're here, and that's fine. You are welcome to believe whatever you want. I am confident that anyone following this thread will make their own minds up.
I'm bored...
1. Of course you do. But you can't argue about the existence of characteristics of God that you don't define.
2. I am glad you believe there is evidence for God.
3. Evolution does not explain objective morality. So if not objective morality then it is subjective morality. If slavery bettered out chances at surviving, why do you think it was 'wrong'?
4. See, you don't get to interpret scriptures for a systematic theology you do not understand. You are cutting and pasting some stupid atheist top 10 objections that have been so thoroughly refuted it really shows how shallow your understanding of what it is you arguing about. How do you expect to be taken seriously when you make beginner mistakes?
5. Fine. I only argued about it because the OP suggest that Christians ignore the difficult passages. I don't think anything should be ignored.
6. I had no illusions as to what my responses would accomplish. I do it as an exercise for my own benefit.
That being said, I am done with this topic for now.
