(September 28, 2011 at 10:10 am)Jesuslovesyou Wrote: Debate is always good. I'm not being 'trollish' I'm being Socratic.
Lets recap...
In post #2, despite the fact that the thread title, the OP and the blog are specifically about the Christian god, you reply that the blog doesn't disprove a god, only the Abrahamic god.
Well, duh.
Was this one of your examples of being Socratic?
Then in post #6 you post this little gem. "Then you accept you have no evidence to disprove the existence of God(s) in general?".
This sounds much more like failed logic to me than being Socratic.
But hey, that could just be me.
Then this in post #9, "I couldn't possibly do that. In fact it's quite probable Zeus is sitting on mount Olympus watching us right now".
So wait, now you understand why your post in #6 fails? At least you're a fast learner.
Then this in post #16, "Picking holes in the bible is child's play, which is why this forum is focused on bashing Christians and their 'God'."
Maybe it's focused on Christianity because those are the majority of theists that post here? Just guessing....
I believe we are all waiting for your brilliant use of Socratic method.
Until then, it sure looks more like trollish behavior.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
