Neanderthaland wrote:Australian rePublic wrote:I don't see how this intereferes with my beliefs. As said earlier, I do not believe in a literal interpretation of the story of Adam and Eve. If I don't believe in a literal interpration of something, then what's the point in arguing about its details
I'm speaking generally. You have time and time again brought up something you thought was a good argument for Christian theism, or at the very least a nice "gotcha" for atheists, but every time it gets effortlessly smacked down.
I guess I'm just wondering how someone who can be so consistently wrong, can be so convinced that they're ultimately right?
Seconded. Even The Archregimancy was aghast at it:
The Archregimancy wrote:what an embarrassingly poor job Australian rePublic is doing of defending Christianity. The thread's devolved into atheists making mincemeat of one of the worst Christian apologists (using the latter word in the traditional sense) in the history of NSG. Really, it's cringe-inducing.
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=457461&p=35319330#p35319330