tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3888748335263186098.post3582117159348374601..comments2022-11-29T09:54:56.675-07:00Comments on Philosophy Notes: Deconstructing AtheismDave Jilkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18171837898009574517noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3888748335263186098.post-3526268853848700392019-08-03T14:45:14.400-06:002019-08-03T14:45:14.400-06:00Issues of testimony are a solid tack in questionin...Issues of testimony are a solid tack in questioning the provenance of various god-stories. If the range of gods is narrowed to existing religions, it is a much easier problem: we know some of the history and have plenty of concrete contradictions on which we can base judgment.Dave Jilkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18171837898009574517noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3888748335263186098.post-28048758127525221272019-08-03T13:42:57.462-06:002019-08-03T13:42:57.462-06:00The idea that the word god does not refer to a thi...The idea that the word god does not refer to a thing seems sound. I suspect that most atheists could agree with that. God would also seem to fall into that category of fiction. Most religions have 'holy scripts' written by or on behalf of their god. It seems acceptable to call the notions of god put about today as fictional, so god is in one sense a fictional character, created by those who wrote the texts. For some reason, people are not ashamed to lie to propagate what they see as the truth. We have a choice of what lies behind the scripts, self-delusion or self-serving lies. A third possibility is that the writers were recording the words of people they trusted, and so thought they were recording true events.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17249316667971895905noreply@blogger.com