Beyond that, your post (really all of them) >snip< I might just as well preach chastity in a brothel.
I was trying to address the divine attributes, which is an area of philosophy that is fairly well rounded. What you failed to grasp was that I was NOT referring to a biblical God in my definition.
Greybeard is not stupid. Please don't make ad hominem attacks, we are all trying to be civil here.
??What? Galileo was disadvantaged by the RCC for his beliefs? Err, no, not quite. Saying that Nobody dared to question it (the Bible) til 1800 is off by 1600+ years.
Yes I have.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei#Controversy_over_heliocentrism
is fairly interesting. It appears that due to Galileo observing something scientifically, he was sentenced to a lifetime of house arrest, and ordered to read the seven penitential psalms once a week for the next three years... I'm sure that did not disadvantage a scientist at all. [/sarcasm]
Sigh. Have you ever read a history of the Inquisition? It might surprise you to learn what it really was.
That was a Monty Python reference, I don't think that you quite saw that one.
Even so, Cardinal Fang was reluctant to use the comfy chair, so I'm sure that the Spanish Inquisition showed some restraint...
Err... Perhaps this rationalism thing you keep talking about?
Perhaps the fact that a perfect being with no constraints chose to make a book that has errors in to confuse the atheists doesn't make much sense.... Of course we cannot know the mind of God so this is, according to your predicted rebuttal, irrelevant.
Nope. False dichotomy.
I'm going to clarify this in a few more words. Societies change. Many of the laws that were written then are irrelevant now. If Man wrote the book, then the book is imperfect.
Ah! You mean an instruction guide such as accompanies my new rototiller. Well, he didn't do it. So now what?
You must interpret everything literally. You wouldn't look for similes and deep meaning in a manual for a washing machine, neither would you do so in the Bible, which is God's commands to live a satisfying life.
No. No informed person has ever held that it is "perfect". How could it be?
If God wrote the book, then it must be perfect because God is perfect,, and to create imperfection is imperfect. Even if God is all powerful, he can create imperfect things, but it is better to create perfect things. And the scripture we have that almost the entire religion of Christianity is based on is flawed in many places.
The two things have absolutely nothing to do with each other.
see above. You attempt to call Greybeard out on not knowing the relevant philosophy. I'm studying the idea of God at the moment, including the ontological arguments by both Anselm and Descartes. All of these things, indeed anything regarding the idea of a God as defined as a perfect being depend on the divine attributes, and to say it's irrelevant is itself to show a lack of knowledge about the relevant scripture.
Would you like a bibliography that would get you up to speed on what educated Christians believe about the Bible? About God?
I will quote you on this one:
Excuse me? Why should I bother, even if the length of
posts books and links was not an issue. I already demonstrated that your inconsistencies are easy to resolve.
462 words minus quotes...?