I wholeheartedly agree, though I’d add the word dishonest to semantic wankery.
or, he could just be super simple, every claim made about god is that they can do anything and be anything if they want. holy books are also very contradictory in depicting god.
so therefore, this “god” doesn’t need complexity to manage something so complex.
such contradictions is what makes gods improbable (or impossible) to exist
1 Like
Christians call the concept of this god as Divine Simplicity
1 Like
Which “Christians” say this? I know of several sects and cults that do not accept this doctrine.
It may be “mainstream” within most trinitarian cultures but even then there are arguments against if we look at Tertullians original concept as accepted by the Church…
1 Like
The abstractions leak no matter which way they go. One reason there are so many Christian sects / denominations is that it sorts people according to the dogma they are most comfortable with.
Those who identify as Christian but do not fully adhere to the creeds (Mormons, JWs, etc) are an extreme example of that. They see themselves as reformist movements bringing the church back to an orthodoxy that it lost way back near the beginning.
Even within the strictures of my inerrantist / literalist cult, you had millenialists, amillenialists, pre-, mid- and post-tribulationists, dispensationalists and hyper-dispensationalists and so forth. Leaking in around the edges you had the ability to be charismatic-curious in various ways as well.
This was one of the things that helped my badly damaged bullshit detector to start stirring to life.