(September 20, 2011 at 8:58 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Calling something you seem completely unable to even accurately characterize much less refute “crap” seems a bit childish and silly.
Actually, I think I pretty accurately stated what you rephrased. You can put all the flowery language on it you like but all these "arguments" still boil down to the same formula:
"You can't account for X but I can because GodWillsWantsDoesDidIt. And it just so happens that I've come up with a contrived definition of God or some unproven assertion about God specially suited to this argument. You see, it turns out that logic is a reflection of how God thinks or it turns out that moral goodness is bound in the very nature of God etc and I know all this because I just got through pulling it all out of my ass."
Pure philoso-babble crap. All this posited because you have not a shred of hard evidence to back up your extraordinary claims.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
