jack: (Default)
[personal profile] jack
Sorry, not really. (Well, not necessarily. Uh, I mean, I didn't have any reason to say that, other than as a humorous example of a controversial subject. Argue amongst yourselves if you so wish, but don't blame me. Just look at this bracket, it's amazing how many words saying nothing takes up :))

Where is everyone? My "inbox" has been nearly unclogged of lj updates recently -- have you all become productive or something? Have you all moved to chiark or myspace?

ETA: OK, that seemed to work :)

Date: 2006-12-05 09:05 am (UTC)
simont: A picture of me in 2016 (Default)
From: [personal profile] simont
Er, huh? Who says there's at most one god? Certainly at most one of the conflicting accounts of god(s) is true, but some of those accounts involve more than one god, and I expect there are some pairs of accounts which are mutually non-exclusive so their gods could coexist if necessary.

then argue for the existence of a theory of God where he is a coward

Again, huh? I was under the impression that I was arguing the statement "God is a coward" to be potentially meaningless, not true. Which of us has misunderstood the other?

Date: 2006-12-05 03:53 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com
I tend to agree with your confusion.

Though, I think maybe the point is that if it were the case that God being a coward were meaningless, then so would God being brave -- so could be viewed as either a good or bad thing if you were so inclined?