Re: Netanyahu, That Horrid Hawk

Jantero was a case study religious self-deception from the
beginning to the end.

He started by deluding himself that the idea "none of them
ever appear to mankind and prove their existence and
powers" was a good argument against the existence of gods. The
problem in his thinking was obvious: he overlooked every
case where they're uncompelled or uninclined to do a
song-and-dance routine according to the stories told about them.

Some are described following their own whims (the OT deity
is an example). Others are said to be selective about who
they reveal themselves to (e.g. the NT deity), and others still
are reported to stay happily in their heavens (Buddhism
mentions some of those). Or take the creator-god who's posited
by deism: according to the story there he doesn't intervene in
the world after he's finished with making the place, so to
conclude that he's imaginary because he hasn't put on a
Broadway production for its inhabitants is unadulterated idiocy.

Instead of fixing his mistake, Jantero pretended he'd only
been "raising a very pointed question." Untrue -- he had
firmly asserted gods "don't exist, except in the human
imagination" -- and an obvious admission he couldn't defend his
reasoning.

Amusingly enough, he also ran in the opposite direction by
insisting that he'd been offering a tautology. Nevermind
about being truthful: Jantero couldn't even stick to his story.

Jantero's delusions extended all the way to my side of the
discussion. He fooled himself into thinking I refused to
supply any examples (deleting them from his replies to make the
job a little bit easier), and once again contradicted
himself by claiming he'd somehow 'rebutted' my example of deism.

Of course that was another of his fantasies. After a trip
to his encyclopaedia he chattered about Edward Herbert's
elevation to the lower nobility, which century deism dated from
and whether or not to categorize it as a separate religion
without ever addressing the fatal problem that it posed for his
logic.

The rest of Jantero's fairy-tales were just as easy to see
through. He dreamed up a dialogue where I asked him to
"assume the god exists" -- never happened -- argued that the OT
stories are literally true (ditto), contended he ought to
believe in gods -- another one of his illusions -- and so forth.

I simply explained what his argument against the existence
of gods missed, viz. every case where they're unrequired to
give a performance for mankind as a whole. He never thought up
an honest reply.

-- Catawumpus
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Netanyahu, That Horrid Hawk
    ... Jantero was a case study religious self-deception from the ... powers" was a good argument against the existence of gods. ... himself by claiming he'd somehow 'rebutted' my example of deism. ...
    (soc.history.medieval)
  • Re: Netanyahu, That Horrid Hawk
    ... Jantero was a case study religious self-deception from the ... powers" was a good argument against the existence of gods. ... himself by claiming he'd somehow 'rebutted' my example of deism. ...
    (soc.history.medieval)
  • Re: Netanyahu, That Horrid Hawk
    ... Jantero was a case study religious self-deception from the ... powers" was a good argument against the existence of gods. ... himself by claiming he'd somehow 'rebutted' my example of deism. ...
    (soc.history.medieval)
  • Re: Netanyahu, That Horrid Hawk
    ... Jantero was a case study religious self-deception from the ... powers" was a good argument against the existence of gods. ... himself by claiming he'd somehow 'rebutted' my example of deism. ...
    (soc.history.medieval)
  • Re: Netanyahu, That Horrid Hawk
    ... Jantero was a case study religious self-deception from the ... powers" was a good argument against the existence of gods. ... himself by claiming he'd somehow 'rebutted' my example of deism. ...
    (soc.history.medieval)