Amoral Inaction

[Captain Scarlet]

I don't need a god -and I made no such claim that theists are flawed in their beliefs ...pray tell, where did I say that theists are flawed? Interpolate what you want - the post is clear and plain to read.

"They need a god so they can explain away their miserable lives or make sense of their day or justify their war or understand why "bad things" happen. Revealed religions of the world are designed for weak stupid people who want some kind of reason to get out of bed in the morning. I don't need a god"

Seems clear to me. If you don't think it does well... I can't help that

And regarding that the universe is explainable .. you did indeed say that, regardless of how you now want to define it. You wrote, quote, "we now have superior explanations for the universe". Only now are you putting perameters on that statement (see your new post below).

I did not. I said with respect to design and first cause arguments there are superior explanations. I did not say the universe is explicable, and furthermore I don't believe it is yet. Repeating the same point does not make it true, just becuase you want it to fit your argument/s. What paramaters?, they are already in the sentence when it refers design and first cause arguments.

I stand by what I said about rebuttals. You added an argument that I didn't initially make and you deny your own statements (see above) Obviously, ANYONE who believes in God, whether it be a Deist or not, is going to take issue with the phrase, "we now have superior explanations for the universe", because in the context you wrote it - it was a sweeping generalization about mankinds knowledge of the entire universe.

I agree with your point about rebuttals. But I have no case to answer here because in the context I wrote I didn't say mankind now knows everything. Thats is your interpolation of what I said. I think we know enough however to go head to head with theism/deism on the grounds they once solely occupied, and argue that the natural explanations are superior to supernatural ones for the origins and perceived design in the universe. Obviously an atheist is going to take issue with the need for a god at all. I cannot see how you could construe this as a sweeping generalisation, but then to do that you have had to misconstrue my words. Yours clearly was: "They need a god so they can explain away their miserable lives"

If my answer to Min's question was not to your satisfaction, there's little I can do about that...Clear enough?

I agree there is little you can do, doesn't stop me saying I don't think you answered it. Clearly you feel no burden to offer a fuller explanation as to why, nor offer any reasoning. There is little I can do about that.