careful not to throw out logic because you'll lose the debate. > existence exists and logic exists is not giving an account for those things, and yes it is needed, if you want to live in a universe that is coherent. if you like chaos, then sure, like the gods' constant warring, grounding logic and good and bad is not really necessary. it's "my will" and "might is right" and pretty much nothing else. the trinity has a basis in the ot, for example in the theophanies where the angel of the lord appears, that is the son. i'm not going to quote the bible to someone who rejects it apriori, that is why i used the tag. > i'm clearly right, christians cannot help themselves but larp as jews and take all those cultural artifacts very, very seriously. as a pagan, i'd say that is to be expected, as we can't transcend this material body. from there it follows that the material prescriptions cannot be handwaved, they are as necessary and serious as metaphysical teachings. after all, we're here for a reason. because of that, we also reject the radical christian onthology and supposed omnipotence, which is another jewish monstrosity. that's two non-sequitirs in a row, i don't know what you're saying. > last paragraph there's a difference between current state of something and its essence. if you can't make a distinction between the protocols of the elders of zion, the kalergi plan, et al, and the new testament, there's really no point in continuing the conversation. this is just revisionism.   that's not what the 'god of the gaps' means. no, it's about giving an account for logic, consciousness, mathetmatics, good and evil and other metaphysical categories. this is where paganism and atheism complement eachother in that they both share an implication that the universe is in constant chaos with endlessly warring gods and matter in brownian motion, with no serious meaning.
United Kingdom