Logical Disproofs of a Biblical Type God

[JohnJubinsky]

I am new to the forum and cannot find any of the replies except the 1st one. When I click on the links in the e-mails that are supposed to take me to replies I don't see them. I can't even see the replies to my introduction post. I will keep trying. Bare with me.

---

That’s that the point - the premises are NOT well supported, they’re simply assertions.

The notion that good beings are ‘thought of as selfless’ doesn’t really hold up to scrutiny, as there are many beings who manage to be good while maintaining a significant level of self-interest.

As for the temptation thing, it isn’t enough to simply re-phrase what you claimed earlier. I can easily think of several reasons that tempting people is more of a moral good than not tempting.

Judicial systems are a pretty weak example that free will exists. In fact, there are numerous instances where courts decline to punish people by finding that the accused are not always responsible for their actions.

You made a subtle change in you child rape example - you went from ‘could’ to ‘would’. It’s clear that a god in the Abrahamic mode COULD prevent child rape. Whether such a god WOULD do so is an unjustified assumption. God may have sufficient reasons for allowing child rape that you know nothing about.

Founded in Descartes or not, your 5th premise is essentially your first.

Since each of your opening statements are flawed, I feel justified in dismissing the arguments you base on them.

Boru

I can see that you are missing the points in several ways and I am not prepared to spend a lot of time explaining them again. Let' just agree to disagree.