(August 4, 2010 at 5:51 am)fr0d0 Wrote: To me, rational doesn't have to include the independently verifiable, which I'm guessing is your condition here.
It doesn't depend on being independently verifiable, there is also the option of logical necessity. Shame that you have neither.
Quote: Sure if your model was consistent I'd consider it as an alternative. I do consider atheism a viable alternative. I hold my current world view despite it being based on non verifiable evidence. I don't eliminate it because of that. To me it's the more rational choice. (No insult intended in my use of the word rational)
What is this non-verifiable evidence you speak of?
Also, would you like to expand on that idea that 'holding a worldview despite the lack of evidence indicating and logical necessity requiring it is more rational than withholding judgement'? I can assure you it is not.
Quote:I have rationalised it using the method above. "We can't know the mind of God", or : I credit God with having the knowledge to decide fairly given all possibilities. We may find it unfair, but then we can't know what God knows, so our conclusions aren't fully informed.
So you have nothing beyond the stock standard absolving of one's own moral compass... How very typical of you.
Quote:Scientists said that continental drift enabled life on earth and so justify the associated loss of life. I agree with that reasoning too.
So God couldn't create life without first moving the plates about?

Also, i completely fail to see how you can equate the act of your god neglecting to aid the suffering of innocence with "natural mechanism". Beyond your hollow assertions of God caring and all that jazz, how exactly does your god differ from an algorithm?
Quote:Haha!
Jesus was born without a father. We discount that as vastly improbable and more probable to have been his mother lying or fertilisation occurring naturally somehow. Heck we can call it a myth the evidence is so thin.
I appreciate the most annoying thing to you here is the separation from fact. I must concede your point there.
Wow... that would be a first.

.