taoist said:
The refutations followed a direct request by Pastor Enyart in the course of the post-game show, which included the combined response of a number of atheists on TOL, though Bob seems to have conveniently misplaced that memory. [That thread] somehow seems to have vanished from TOL, no doubt due to some inadvertent deletion.
Fortunately, it still has a following in PDF format, or so I infer from the odd request that still comes in to my yahoo email account. -Jesse
BE: Odd, no doubt. What I recall of Taoist is summed up below. And whatever multiplied posts he hereafter may have offered, I was finished with BR VII.
The Battle Royale Center Ring still lists Post Game Show - BR VII . At the time, Flipper combined the three atheist posts from himself, Taoist, and Heusden.
My reply is still there also.
Here, I'll just quote the beginning of my reply to Taoist's first argument.
Taoist: Pastor Enyart believes in a God who is (a) the supernatural Creator of the natural universe, (b) existing eternally, (c) powerful, (d) wise and knowledgeable, (e) personal, (f) loving, and (g) just. Of the good pastor’s seven attributes, the last five could describe any good mortal ruler, and are anything but unique to a divinity. The first two are impossible to ascertain by natural, mortal beings…
Enyart: Any Mortal: I will show below that apart from God’s existence, Taoist could not claim that these “last five could describe any good mortal ruler.” But first, notice the form of Taoist’s argument: In principle, I reject as irrelevant anything in a description of God that could also be descriptive of men. Imagine if we were debating whether the moon really exists or if it’s just a phantom in the sky, and I offered that the moon has mass as evidenced by its pull on the oceans, and Taoist shoots back: Well, the Earth has mass also, so I reject that part of the definition. Debating atheists is like dealing with spoiled brats. This is the kind of irrationality that we theists must put up with. And Taoist leads off his argument with this. Typically, I lead off my arguments with my second strongest and most well thought-out point (I try to save the strongest for last). If any single attribute of God is proved conclusively, then God’s exists. (I know, I know, the average atheists cannot process that last statement… but that’s not my fault.) If I showed a physics proof that God’s eternal power must exist, then I would have shown that God exists, regardless of what other “power” we can find in the universe. (I know, I know, the atheist comprehension thing…) If my definition redundantly stated (perhaps only to humor Huey), that “God exists,” well then Taoist could shoot back, “so do men! nah, nah, nah.” If I stated, “God can think,” TA: “so do men!!” “God is alive,” “so are men, three strikes and you’re out Bob!!!” The monotheism in the world teaches that God created man “in His likeness,” that is, we have personalities and power, we can embrace wisdom and knowledge, we recognize justice, and we can love. That is the belief system that Taoist has volunteered to refute. I’m discouraged at the sloppy reasoning displayed when Taoist starts off by rejecting non-unique attributes of God. For I also described God as “the supernatural Creator of the natural universe, existing eternally,” which by definition distinguishes Him from any “mortal.” Now let’s look at those five attributes that we share, albeit imperfectly, with God... -END QUOTE- (from Post Game Show - BR VII)
Why Taoist would want to remind anyone of all this is beyond me. -Bob Enyart
