(February 26, 2014 at 5:15 am)Esquilax Wrote:(February 26, 2014 at 4:31 am)fr0d0 Wrote: No one has substantiated any objection successfully, yet you, so adamant that we shouldn't judge without empirical data, are willing to make an exception in this instance.
Can a guy not assess the actions of a fictional character, now?
The point is that the christian god's actions are laid out in the bible, and that many of those actions are demonstrably immoral. In order for you to find him good, therefore, you must either be ignoring those actions, willfully disregarding them, or employing some form of special exemption in order to maintain your claim that god, as described in the only source you have for his existence, is morally good.
If it's the latterest case, jeez, that's close to moral relativism.
Now that's willful ignorance, and strict duplicity.
You use two standards to judge religion: science when assessing God as something that should exist as hard fact, according to you and idiots like you (creationists, for example), and a very unscientific approach to interpreting the exact meaning of biblical text.
Demonstrably
Me thinks your science is weak young padawan
