This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← Refuting supernatural

xmaseveeve's Avatar Jump to comment 70 by xmaseveeve

Please state the theistic definition of the impossible and contrast it with the atheistic one if you are able. And you'll need to back it up with some textual evidence (i.e. actual quotations from theist/atheist philosophers). I'll wager you will not be able to provide any such evidence.

Certainly. (Apologies for my previous response!) To a theist, the impossible is 'God could do it'. Impossible doesn't compute. No textual evidence required.

Comment 50, Alan,

twit and wizzdumb

Ha ha - because I was thinking about the derivation of the words, it took me a while to get that! That's WLC, exactly; a whizzdumb. All hot air and pig ignorance.

Comment 51, Vrij,

I wonder if we are perceived as crashing against a brick wall when we try to reason with their unreasonable beliefs.

Ha ha, I bet that's exactly how we are perceived by the less-educated believers. The sellers of gods know better. William Lane Craig has backed himself into a corner by justifying genocide on the grounds that we should feel more sorry for the soldiers who slaughtered the children, because they will have to live with the guilt, and, after all, the children went straight to Heaven, so what's the problem? I wouldn't want to share a stage with him. I don't want to share a planet with him.

People who (think they) get their morality from a god are only overriding their innate morality with the hideous morality of a divine dictator. Theist friends out there, you are claiming as your poster boy a man who defends biblical genocide and doesn't connect it to the Holocaust. When an ideology, political or religious, leads to mass murder in its name, you can't justify patent evil with a god trump card. Don't let this man's fancy footwork fool you. Few people can sound so eloquent and be so wrong. Or be so homophobic and look so gay.

Comment 41, jay,

This makes no sense: since the word "God" does not state a proposition how can it be a premise, hidden or otherwise?

Ah, William Lane Craig's party piece. The ontological argument, in both forms, treats existence as a quality. Think it through again, with that in mind, Jay. I hope you come back on, if you're still lurking. We're not hostile to you personally.

Sun, 15 Jul 2012 15:16:18 UTC | #949248