If you have invented these gods for argument's sake to prove a point, then it is obvious that they cannot account for the preconditions of intelligibility, since reality (intelligibility) cannot be justified by fiction (invented gods). If you want to argue that one of these gods is real and you sincerely believe in him/it, then we can discuss why competitors cannot account for the preconditions of intelligibility based on their nature. As one example, you have said that your gods are not a trinity. Thus, they cannot account for the one-and-the-many, the way the biblical God can. Moreover, there is no objective revelation from these gods. In order to account for all the preconditions of intelligibility, your alternative god would have to be identical in all respects to the biblical God, in which case it would have to be the biblical God, as John rightly stated. But such a conversion can only take place when you concede that you do sincerely believe in such a god, since a fictional god cannot logically justify anything
37 comments
Do you know what intelligibility means, Jason?
there is no objective revelation from these gods.
There is none from your "God" either.
Again with this "precondition of intelligibility" crap. Do you even know what those words mean?
in·tel·li·gi·ble (in-tel'i-j?-b?l)
Did somebody once tell you that they'll only debate with you on the condition that your argument is intelligble and that's why you're throwing in the phrase? You're doing the opposite by throwing together terms in a nonsensical manner and never explaining what the hell you're trying to say. Do you mean you think the universe would only run on an insane ever-shifting set of principles and physics incomprehensible to a rational mind? Do you mean people would be unable to communicate without magic sky daddy? What? Explain yourself damn it!
In order to account for all the preconditions of intelligibility, your alternative god would have to be identical in all respects to the biblical God, in which case it would have to be the biblical God
You're not stacking the odds in your favor at all, huh? Well, good thing the only gods that can logically exist have to be identical in all respects to the Norse gods, in which case they can only be the Norse gods.
As one example, you have said that your gods are not a trinity. Thus, they cannot account for the one-and-the-many
Yeah, but your god doesn't have a magic hammer. Thus, you cannot account for lightning.
the way the biblical God can. Moreover, there is no objective revelation from these gods.
Your god's revelation is that he defeats evil. Evil still exists. The Norse gods revealed to us that they defeated the frost giants. You don't see any frost giant around, do you?
Intelligiblity? Dafuq?
image
... reality (intelligibility) cannot be justified by fiction (invented gods).
Yes! Could it be? Have we gotten our point across to a godbot?
I guess not.
*weeps*
"In order to account for all the preconditions of intelligibility, your alternative god would have to be identical in all respects to the biblical God"
"If you have invented these gods for argument's sake to prove a point, then it is obvious that they cannot account for" tl;dr...
...you've just discovered Russell's Teapot and His Holy Sauciness the Flying Spaghetti Monster, haven't you eh, Jasey-boy?
(*Presses Tannoy microphone button *)
Paging Mister Spak. Mister Spak, please go to the Ted Faggard Career Memorial Hypocrisy Exposure Ward, as a patient is waiting. And please bring the main reflecting element of the Hubble Space Telescope with you.
...oh, and 'If. ' [/Spartan Laconic Wit]
"since reality (intelligibility) cannot be justified by fiction (invented gods)"
Except, of course, your invented god.
i hate this guy so much. why does he insist on writing? and why do i come to fstdt to read what he writes?
the answer to the first question is because he's trying to kill me. the answer to the second one is because i hate myself.
We need to lock you in a room with a believer in John Frum . First, to observe how far you get with your God-blasted, brain-dead, circumferential babble. Next, to see who comes out alive and/or intact.
Stating that one of the peculiarities of your god-belief is a precondition to godhood... that's a new level of crazy for me. Let me try that on for size.
Unlike Shiva, your god does not have many arms, therefore your god can't be a god!
When you get in a debate with Lisle he closes comments and then keeps replying to you even though you can't defend yourself.
Anyway the thing about Lisle is that he seems to be trying to convince himself more then anything else.
Gee, John, Christianity isn't the only religion with triune gods. The Greeks had Artemis, Selene, and Hecate, associated with moon phases. Romans had Luna, Diana, and Proserpina--sky, earth, underworld. The Norse had the Norns, who are phases of time--past, present, future. Other cultures had their own 3-in-1 gods/goddesses. So I guess they're equal to your deity.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
