(September 12, 2010 at 3:58 pm)ThinkingMan Wrote: "So you either want to debate in which case you need to counter claims already offered to you in posts: of question begging, special pleading and compositional errors in the cosmological argument or you don't. Every time anyone demonstrates a logical fallacy in your arguments"See my first post on this thread I am not going to re-post.
For the second time can you show me where this 'questions begging, special pleading...' etc are.
Quote:Something to the effect of well if God is such then how can God be such and so on or how is such a thing explained and so on. I'm still waiting for somebody to pick a hole in my logic from my original post.You really are confused here. This has nothing to do with the informal fallacies of special pleading and question begging nor even compositional errors. This is much more about the logical incosistencies in the god concept. Totally different subject but no less fascinating. Which do you want to debate?
"I still say a church steeple with a lightning rod on top shows a lack of confidence"...Doug McLeod.
