Testing The Christian Apologists

Our decisions are in the universe - so your god did not crerate everything in the universe. That's the logic. Pretty simple. That's not how it works in our justice system. If you plant landmines in your front yard, you're responsible for the consequences.

I think I smell a No True Scotsman fallacy. Not really. It's just part of being a social species. What we do for others is love.

Not "self-serving". Just serving.

Well, it isn't "only".But in any case, service that benefits the server as well as the servee is, if anything, better than one-way service. Service in a restaurant is better if the waitress gets paid. Better than slavery.

Service is service. It's all about getting along together, cooperation.Love does not have to be "sacrificial". That's just an excuse to shoehorn Jesus' death into the equation. He may have sacrificed His life but He didn't actually accomplish anything by doing it. He would have shown more love by tipping the waitress at the Last Supper.

Foreign aid is only a tiny part of our international cooperation. We gain far more than we "sacrifice" by getting along with our fellow earthlings.

Pretty well. We can't grow bananas in Saskatchewan but we can get 'em. And as my father used to say, we can't eat all of the wheat we grow. I don't think you're using a valid metric. Jesus Himself seemed to measure value not by how much you give but by how much you keep back for yourself - e.g. two mites is more than bags and bags of gold.

There aren't many things in the world that work perfectly all of the time. That's no reason to dismiss the value of social interaction.

Ever hear of idolatry? Idolatry is making a religion of something that is not God. Idolatry does not need God.

On the contrary, you can not form theories about anything based on beliefs. Theories are based on facts.

But that something can be entirely imaginary. You can build a religion based entirely on imagination - and most people do. Religion requires no god and God - if there was one - requires no religion.

That's where I disagree with you. I think "Satan" definitely can - and does - impersonate "God". Your "experiences" of God are just as likely to be experiences of Satan.But of course Satan is not an outside entity - and neither is God.

quote:

---

Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.
-- Stephen R. Covey

---

quote:

---

You cannot truly listen to anyone and do anything else at the same time.
-- M. Scott Peck

---

I don't know who they are. That's what I mean. You use that as a rote answer to everything. You don't have to actually think about anything because you already have The Answer™.

No, I mean you don't give the new answers proper consideration because you assume a priori that they're wrong (because you want them to be wrong). I don't believe you do. You're constantly saying that you refuse to give up your beliefs. Yes. If you have really thought about it, I don't see how you could do anything else. "Deify" is not the right word. I might go so far as to say "revere" but I think "respect" would be more accurate.And yes, again, evidence IS the default standard. It really is. Well, no. I have gathered NONE of it and neither has anybody else, which is why I don't believe in God. That's the same standard that you use for unicorns. You're the one who is inconsistent, not me.And I don't "reject" God any more than I reject unicorns. I would be quite happy to ride a unicorn if you could saddle one for me. And I would be quite happy to discuss your silly theology with God if you could sit Him down on my couch. Think that through. You would need "more" than facts to stop clinging to a lack of facts? What ever happened to your claim that you consider new ideas on their merit?

You're wrong. A war would imply two sides and that's ridiculous. There are hundreds of different ideologies. That's not an excuse for denying the facts that are available. But that's entirely different from you. On what do you base that conclusion? How do you distinguish between non-user-friendly and non-existent? I also ignore the unicorns and so do you. Why do you ignore the unicorns? To each according to his need. That isn't even coherent. Well, of course I would throw away any conclusions that I might have had. It doesn't matter how vivid the memories are. If it didn't happen, it didn't happen. Yes.Duh.I'm trying to wrap my head around how you could not understand that....Yes, our heads trick us.Let me tell you a story: For Grade One, I went to a one-room country school with all of the grades in one room. The school was originally built in the 1920s. I was born in 1952. In 1954, they built a new school beside the old one and then moved the old one away. For one summer, when I was two, mind you, the schools stood side-by side. I recently came across a photograph of the two scools side-by-side. The funny thing is, I have absolutely no memory of the new school. All of the memories I have of that school are distinctly of the old school.I don't have any voodoo explanations for that. I just accept that my head tricked me. Stop lying. I have told you many times that if God existed, I would be happy to accept Him.