3 ms·
Oh, well you should have asked for that then. I don't think theologians prove or debunk things, personally. I'm pointing out that the problems dawkins poses ar
by giraffe_lady 4y ago
Oh, well you should have asked for that then.
I don't think theologians prove or debunk things, personally. I'm pointing out that the problems dawkins poses are ones theologians have answered. And then the answers have been questioned, and then the theologians have answered those, back and forth for a good long while now.
I'm pointing out that to bring these up as if religions have no answer to them is foolish or disingenuous. I'm not volunteering to cross-reference the book to 1700 years of christian thought for you though. Neither qualified nor motivated for that.
- epups 4y agoSorry but you're dodging the question here. You said "the attacks he chose were effectively fended off hundreds or in some cases thousands of years ago by theology and apologetics". Which specific arguments are you referring to?
- suggestion 4y agoYou're exactly the kind of person the article is talking about.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- epups 4y agoIronically I personally disliked The God Delusion when I read it many years ago, and I have written professionally about two of the topics Horgan mentions as hard ones (biological determinism and psychiatric drugs). That said, I think many of the arguments in this thread are ludicrous and should not remain uncontested in a place like HN.