First, Dave asserts;
(Dave 4/15) Yes, it can be discussed. However, the "ultimate" error of
the Bible would be that God does not exist, a fact no one can show.
Then Ian responds;
(Ian 4/15) That's true. No one can prove that god does exist and no one
can prove that god does not exist.
But note--even though Ian omits the capitalization, he uses precisely
the same _word_ that Dave uses, so it appears on the surface as if there
is some kind of actual dialog taking place
(DAVe 4/16) Michael: Yes, there is a debate going on. I capitalize "God"
because I am referring to a specific god. Ian, by using small letters, if
showing that he doesn't believe specifically in my God, but is including any
and all gods that could exist. And as you can see from my statements here,
I am well aware of the different uses of the word we are discussing.
Michael
--but if we substitute with
more accurate, more descriptive phrases - - -
(DAVe 4/16) Michael: Please tell us more of what is already obvious to us
all Michael. Anything more? Oh yes, I see there is.....
Dave-Yes, it can be discussed. However, the "ultimate" error of the
Bible would be that <Yahweh> does not exist. . .
Ian-No one can prove that <a conscious causative agent for the universe>
does exist and no one can prove that <a conscious causative agent for
the universe> does not exist . . .
(DAVE 4/16) Michael: Wrong. I am arguing the existence of God/Yahweh.
Ian is disagreeing with this argument, so you should put Yahweh in place as
well. If we aren't talking about God, we have no reason to debate or argue.
Michael
It becomes immediately obvious that each is talking right past
the other, thus when Dave's next comment---
(Dave 4/15) So to argue it as knowing he doesn't exist, would be a false
premise. That is all.
Is treated with the appropriate modification,
Dave-So to argue it as knowing <Yahweh> doesn't exist . . .
It also becomes clear that Dave has succeeded in confusing Ian
enough to elicit the comment - - -
(Ian 4/15) I don't necessarily agree with you.
Let me say, BULLSHIT.
(DAVE 4/16) Michael: Yes, I am aware of what you think of sincere
discussion. Ian doesn't agree with me. Seems rather appropriate for an
errantist wouldn't you say?
Michael
Ian doesn't agree with Dave's ACTUAL
assertion AT ALL. He has been confused by the equivocal manner of Dave's
use of "God".
(DAVE 4/16) Michael: Oh my, now I've duped Ian - I'm sure Ian will be
ahppy to hear that.
Michael
What I recommend for everyone is that in any attempted responses
to Dave, that you go through and change any references, direct OR
indirect to "God" to Yahweh. That's what Dave really means.
(DAVE 4/16) Michael: Yes it is, unless I am not talking about God, but
about gods. Then I use a small "g". I'm a Christian, Michael. God is God
for me. Surely you must understand this concept. So certainly, type Yahweh
if you must, that is fine. I don't think too many people have trouble
understanding who I am talking about.
Michael
And that anywhere you wish to refer to a possible supernatural
"Creator" you use some other term, "The Tao", or "Allah", or even
"independent conscious agent".
(DAVE 4/16) Michael: No, "god" is fine.
Michael
It will take a little time to rewrite Dave's posts, and feel a
little unnatural making the substitution where you are accustomed to
just tossing off "God"---but you will find that much of Dave's
"argument" suddenly vanishes into thin air, leaving Dave in the
unenviable position of ole Wiley Coyote--way off the end of the
precipice with no means of support.
(DAVE 4/16) Michael: Ok. I guess.
Take away Dave's equivocations, and you'll find him a much more
docile beast.
He may quite trying to tangle with YOU too!!
(DAVE 4/16) Michael: ? Are you really this full of yourself? You have to
be joking. Well, no, I forgot - you're not. You have just rambled on in a
whole post about what is obvious - that when I put God, I mean God. Not A
god, but God. I have confused what others mean when they put god or God -
and I won't tangle with you?! Wow.
Regards.
Dave.
"True faith cannot exist when doubt isn't around to ask the hard questions."
- Kenneth Gibble