RE: Atheism's Definition - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
December 4, 2011 at 2:46 am
(This post was last modified: December 4, 2011 at 2:55 am by reverendjeremiah.)
(December 3, 2011 at 9:55 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Even if one gave Lucent his favorite definition of atheism, it would still be possible to be an atheist with regards to his god. His favorite narrative has been utterly destroyed by evidence at every conceivable level. If the god he wishes to argue for is the christian god, sourced wholly from this narrative, then it does not exist, and that's not a belief, that's a fact. His god, his book, and his beliefs (as well as his inane ramblings about science) are all demonstrably full of shit.
Unless God is malevolent. If that be the case he planned on that bible to be the way it is, along with all the other religions. Its like a metaphysical cluster fuck when you mention comparative religions of the world.
...not to mention all the nasties out there in the wild..God would have created them nasty boogers as well...
...and the viruses and diseases. Jehovah intelligently designed the bacteria flagellum so that it can infiltrate the body of an innocent little gril and give her all kinds of fucked up diseases...
...and tyranical government. Jehovah obviously likes the political Muslim world, otherwise it would not exist. Freewill be damned, if I set a snake in my 3 month old infants room and tell him "stay away from him or you may get hurt and die" then I'm not giving a shit about freewill. That is merely a comparison of father (human) and son (human) unlike what it would really be equated to in this example as Mortal and infinitely powerful god. God is mysterious, and we will never know why he designed AIDS to be such an efficient killer....
(December 4, 2011 at 1:35 am)Rhythm Wrote: The fire and the ice closing hands, or Ask and Embla btw Rev? Both good creation narratives. Ask and Embla is a mix of discovery and creation, in the truest sense, as the brothers made us from trees which they came across on a walk. At least the Edda acknowledges that it would take more than one mind to create something quite as complex as a human being, if we were created by a mind at all. It's amusing though, that there is a religious narrative that essentially states "we come from the trees"... Well, you clever bastards...how did you figure that out...lol?
I was going to use that argument as "pre-scientific knowledge" that makes the Eddas a true profit and divinely inspired if Lucid would have allowed me to argue Asatru
