Universalism

[Shaker]

You're on shaky ground invoking the concept of logic, Alan.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Salvation is indeed offered to everyone.  And it is logical that in order to receive what is offered, you need to accept God's love and mercy.  God has given us the gift of free will in order that we can freely accept His love and forgiveness.  It is not logical for those who reject God's love and mercy to receive His gift of salvation.

A word of advice old son: if you really want to proselytise for your god, you really should stay away from any mention of logic. The moment you try to apply logic to your arguments for "God" they collapses in a heap. You're better advised just to stick with "but that's my faith" which is essentially unchallengeable, though I'll grant you that it comes at the cost of providing no reason at all for anyone else to agree with you. 

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

...and what are you guys trying to tell me on this board?

Perhaps that telling lies does you no favours?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

AB,

A word of advice old son: if you really want to proselytise for your god, you really should stay away from any mention of logic. The moment you try to apply logic to your arguments for "God" they collapses in a heap. You're better advised just to stick with "but that's my faith" which is essentially unchallengeable, though I'll grant you that it comes at the cost of providing no reason at all for anyone else to agree with you.

Oh dear. Hillside in Arthur Daly mode.

The That's my faith argument.....pure Dawkinsian strawman.

[Shaker]

Oh dear. Hillside in Arthur Daly mode.

The That's my faith argument.....pure Dawkinsian strawman.

So you're presumably disagreeing that Alan's statements (most recent example: #24) are based on his faith?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So you're presumably disagreeing that Alan's statements (most recent example: #24) are based on his faith?

No Dawkins goes on about theists saying in the public domain that things are true because of the theists faith. That is a Dawkinsian strawman par excellence.

Hillside also is either chucking the word logic or God around shamanic-ally to bolster his car crash of an argument.

[Shaker]

No Dawkins goes on about theists saying in the public domain that things are true because of the theists faith.

I'll ask the question again - perhaps you'll answer this time. Are you stating that theists do not as a matter of fact do exactly and precisely this?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

Oh dear. Hillside in Arthur Daly mode.

The That's my faith argument.....pure Dawkinsian strawman.

You mean you have an argument for "God" other than your personal faith?

Really?

Wow!

OK, it's been years in the waiting but I've got the Twiglets and a case of Vimto in so, finally, give it your best shot Big Guy!

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

No Dawkins goes on about theists saying in the public domain that things are true because of the theists faith. That is a Dawkinsian strawman par excellence.

Er, no - it's actually what the religious will often tell you to be the case. Your can't blame RD for quoting it.

Hillside also is either chucking the word logic or God around shamanic-ally to bolster his car crash of an argument.

If you think an argument to be a "car crash", rather than just assert the charge why not finally at least attempt an argument to that effect?

[Alan Burns]

A word of advice old son: if you really want to proselytise for your god, you really should stay away from any mention of logic. The moment you try to apply logic to your arguments for "God" they collapses in a heap. You're better advised just to stick with "but that's my faith" which is essentially unchallengeable, though I'll grant you that it comes at the cost of providing no reason at all for anyone else to agree with you.

Logic is God's gift.  You can use it to discover the truth.  Nothing I believe about God is illogical to me.  And none of the anti theist logic on this board makes any sense to me because it is very shallow.  The ultimate questions you should ask yourself are: How and where did logic originate, where precisely does it reside, can it be defined in material terms and can it be used to explain its own existence?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I'll ask the question again - perhaps you'll answer this time. Are you stating that theists do not as a matter of fact do exactly and precisely this?

A few might. Most of us know there's a swivel eyed intellectual totalitarian antitheist lurking around so don't bother.

And, says Vlad in his best David Attenborough, if we wait quietly one will be along any minute.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

You mean you have an argument for "God" other than your personal faith?

Really?

Wow!

OK, it's been years in the waiting but I've got the Twiglets and a case of Vimto in so, finally, give it your best shot Big Guy!

I'd like to Hillside but I'm afraid I have a prior and more profitable engagement explaining the arguments for God to a brick wall.

[Shaker]

Logic is God's gift.  You can use it to discover the truth.  Nothing I believe about God is illogical to me.

MRDA - Mandy Rice-Davies Applies. (i.e. "He would say that, wouldn't he?").

And none of the anti theist logic on this board makes any sense to me.

Sorry to be blunt, old fruit, but that's because you show no sign whatever of understanding it.

The ultimate questions you should ask yourself are: How and where did logic originate, where precisely does it reside, can it be defined in material terms and can it be used to explain its own existence?

Most of those sound like exactly the questions you don't ask about your god hypothesis, for some reason.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Logic is God's gift.  You can use it to discover the truth.  Nothing I believe about God is illogical to me.  And none of the anti theist logic on this board makes any sense to me.  The ultimate questions you should ask yourself are: How and where did logic originate, where precisely does it reside, can it be defined in material terms and can it be used to explain its own existence?

You misunderstand the word "logic". You can't have logic just for you, and nor is there "anti-theistic" logic. Logic is logic - thus, say, the statement "all lions are cats, therefore all cats are lions" is logically false regardless of your personal opinions for or against something. When you try to argue for "God" using logic that's false (as you do often) then that logic is false, just as it would be if you attempted the same arguments for anything else.

If you'd start with at least a basic understanding of what logic entails perhaps you'd see where you keep going off the rails here.

[Alan Burns]

Sorry to be blunt, old fruit, but that's because you show no sign whatever of understanding it.

I understand more than you give me credit for.  The problem is that it breaks down when you try to fit it in with a universe derived entirely from random unguided deterministic events.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

I'd like to Hillside but I'm afraid I have a prior and more profitable engagement explaining the arguments for God to a brick wall.

Yes, that's probably sensible. As you've never attempted a cogent argument for "God" before it's probably wise to try it out on an inanimate object first so at least you can hear where you get it wrong. I'm not sure talking to a wall will help with your lying problem mind, but baby steps eh?

OK, once you've done that by all means come back and share where you've got to. After all those years of broken logic, misrepresentations and just ignoring pretty much every question put to you I'm quite excited at the notion of you of all people actually attempting an argument!

Good luck with it though...I'll alert the committee for the Templeton prize while you're away

[Shaker]

I understand more than you give me credit for.

I'm resolutely unconvinced. That's because you don't just lay down one bald assertion of personal belief as fact or one logically fallacious non-argument and leave it at that; you keep on doing it time after time after time after time, month in, year out, even when corrected.

So, as I say, I'm unconvinced.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

AB,

You misunderstand the word "logic". You can't have logic just for you, and nor is there "anti-theistic" logic. Logic is logic - thus, say, the statement "all lions are cats, therefore all cats are lions" is logically false regardless of your personal opinions for or against something. When you try to argue for "God" using logic that's false (as you do often) then that logic is false, just as it would be if you attempted the same arguments for anything else.

If you'd start with at least a basic understanding of what logic entails perhaps you'd see where you keep going off the rails here.

I wonder how logic chucked around shamanically fits into this.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

I understand more than you give me credit for.  The problem is that it breaks down when you try to fit it in with a universe derived entirely from random unguided deterministic events.

You think that logic "breaks down"? How so?

If you really think you understand anything at all about logic, why then would you keep trying arguments that are obviously logically false? Surely someone with any grasp at all of the subject would avoid the fallacies and instead focus his efforts on attempting an argument that's logically robust wouldn't he?

[Shaker]

I wonder how logic chucked around shamanically fits into this.

I wonder how your misuse of words you don't understand fits into this.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

I wonder how logic chucked around shamanically fits into this.

Not as much as I wonder why you keep using meaningless phrases like "chucked around shamanically" rather than engage with what's actually said.

[Rhiannon]

Salvation is indeed offered to everyone.  And it is logical that in order to receive what is offered, you need to accept God's love and mercy.  God has given us the gift of free will in order that we can freely accept His love and forgiveness.  It is not logical for those who reject God's love and mercy to receive His gift of salvation.

Really? Do you have any idea what an egotistical bully you make your god sound?

[Rhiannon]

I wonder how logic chucked around shamanically fits into this.

Explain what this means please.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Shales,

I wonder how your misuse of words you don't understand fits into this.

So far as I can tell the split is about 50:50 - half the long words he attempts he genuinely doesn't understand, the other half he deliberately re-defines ("scientism", "philosophical materialism" etc) to support an argument that's long-since been lost.

Given how often he's been corrected on both though he persists with them anyway, so it's all dishonest at heart.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Rhi,

Explain what this means please.

There is no explanation - it's just more avoidance.