Quote:
Quote by: Kamehameha34  This is what I was talking about. You are talking about poking holes in the proof, and he is talking about poking holes in the actual claim.
There's a difference. Poking holes in a claim entails proving it is inconsistent with reality.
Whether or not Zhavric accomplishes this is what's up for debate, but he is outlining his post with correct logic, just in lamens terms. |
Not at all. Only section III could be interprete to poke holes in the God Claim in general.
The rest of the debate was clearly an attempt to prove that God does not exist.