Dawkins to arrest Pope

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
[b]If there is a God, then faith must be apart of our relationship with him.

Why?

Take Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden for example. They presumably had no knowledge of good and evil, so they had to take God's word for the fact that they should avoid the tree that would reveal it to them. In short, they had to rely on God to explain to them that they should not try this or that for reasons that they could not fully comprehend. It is akin to telling your child not to play in the street. The child has no way of comprehending what is being said and why other than to know that they are being told not to do it. In fact, the parent/child relationship is indicated Biblically.

Another way to put it is that no one can create something equal or greater to themselves. Things that are created are merely bits and peices of our knowledge and wisdom so the creation can never out shine its creator. For example, things that we create are merely a reflection of our intelligence and wants and needs and natural tendencies. Those things that we create cannot exceed our "greatness", rather, it is simply a reflection of it. Likewise, we are said to be created in the image of God, hence, we have similar wants and needs, specifically, the drive to love is what makes our lives meaningful. Without love, are lives are empty and meaningless.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn

I don't have to rely on god ever. It's true that sometimes we don't understand some things and what might be happening, but that doesn't mean we have to rely on some mythical being for whom we have little if any real evidence for.

For how long? It seems to me that Adam and Eve seemed to get by without God for a while as well. Actually this independence is nothing but an illusion. Each breath we take is taken out of the grace of God whether we realize it or not.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
Aditionally, if there be a God and such a God is not just and benevolent then we are all screwed.

And why is it so unlikely that we are all screwed?

Because we are still living and seem to be reasonably happy. It seems to me that the greater power in this world is holding it all together despite itself.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn

We have an innate sense of justice that springs up within us that tells us to do unto others as they would do to us.

I'm not sure it's so innate. Not everyone has that too.

[

I disagree. I suppose there are sociopaths, but I view this more of a medical disorder in the brain than I do the status quo. In fact, your own sense of moral justice is why you are questioning the morality of the Almighty in terms of killing the first born in Egypt. If there is no great moral code, what then are you railing against? In fact, we should simply treat it as a simply disagreement much like we may disagree that choclate is a favorable flavor than vanilla.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn

I think bad things happen to people not because of "sin" but because there just isn't any power controlling anything - it is just nature.

No matter how sinless a life we lead there still will be earthquakes and people will still get brutal forms of cancer - sin or no sin.[/b]

If sin had not been introduced into the world, then paradise would NEVER have been lost.

Originally posted by whodey
Take Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden for example. They presumably had no knowledge of good and evil, so they had to take God's word for the fact that they should avoid the tree that would reveal it to them. In short, they had to rely on God to explain to them that they should not try this or that for reasons that they could not fully comprehend. It is a ...[text shortened]... love is what makes our lives meaningful. Without love, are lives are empty and meaningless.

The problem is, in a proper parent-child relationship the parent knows that the child might be tempted to put his hand on the hot burner. The GOOD parent prevents the child from doing it. The horrible parent lets the child burn their hand and then punishes them for acting on their temptation.

God should have known that they would be tempted to sin and hence should have prevented it. God was a negligent parent in this fictional tale.

Originally posted by whodey
For how long? It seems to me that Adam and Eve seemed to get by without God for a while as well. Actually this independence is nothing but an illusion. Each breath we take is taken out of the grace of God whether we realize it or not.

It seems to me that Adam and Eve are and were fictional. Each breath I take is taken out of the grace that I am alive and has nothing to do with god.

Originally posted by whodey
Because we are still living and seem to be reasonably happy. It seems to me that the greater power in this world is holding it all together despite itself.

Some are... but that doesn't mean that we're not all screwed. The axe just hasn't fallen yet.

Originally posted by whodey
I disagree. I suppose there are sociopaths, but I view this more of a medical disorder in the brain than I do the status quo. In fact, your own sense of moral justice is why you are questioning the morality of the Almighty in terms of killing the first born in Egypt. If there is no great moral code, what then are you railing against? In fact, we should si ...[text shortened]... simply disagreement much like we may disagree that choclate is a favorable flavor than vanilla.

I suppose there are sociopaths, but I view this more of a medical disorder in the brain

So you have an excuse as to why it's not innate to sociopaths. That doesn't make it a reason to ignore the example.

If there is no great moral code, what then are you railing against?

When did I say there is no moral code? I didn't. I'm just saying that the god of the bible doesn't obey the moral code that moral humans do or the one they seem to think their fictional god wants them to.

In fact, we should simply treat it as a simply disagreement much like we may disagree that choclate is a favorable flavor than vanilla

I really don't get what you're even talking about here.

Originally posted by whodey
If sin had not been introduced into the world, then paradise would NEVER have been lost.

Paradise never existed.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
The problem is, in a proper parent-child relationship the parent knows that the child might be tempted to put his hand on the hot burner. The GOOD parent prevents the child from doing it. The horrible parent lets the child burn their hand and then punishes them for acting on their temptation.

God should have known that they would be tempted to sin and hence should have prevented it. God was a negligent parent in this fictional tale.

Perhaps God should not have given them free will, or if he had, not allowed them to stick their hand in the burner? Then again, if that is the case the child will NEVER learn that sticking their hand in the burner is "bad". Why not just control everything the child does and says for the rest of their lives? In fact, what is the point of free will at all?

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
Some are... but that doesn't mean that we're not all screwed. The axe just hasn't fallen yet.

You are brushing aside my point. If there is a God and he is manevolent, would you not be suffering this very moment? In fact, why would we all not be suffering at this very moment? If God is manevolent, he is either not all powerful or all knowing.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
In fact, we should simply treat it as a simply disagreement much like we may disagree that choclate is a favorable flavor than vanilla

I really don't get what you're even talking about here.[/b]

What I am saying is, we can disagree about what flavor of ice cream is without innately knowing that one is favorable to the other. But why is it we innately know that not abiding by the Golden Rule is "bad"? In fact, there is no question about it. Its not an opinion like deciding what your flavor of ice cream is.

Originally posted by whodey
Perhaps God should not have given them free will, or if he had, not allowed them to stick their hand in the burner? Then again, if that is the case the child will NEVER learn that sticking their hand in the burner is "bad". Why not just control everything the child does and says for the rest of their lives? In fact, what is the point of free will at all?

Would you allow your child to put their hand in a burner?? Really? You think preventing them from doing that somehow eliminates your kid's free will? B.S.

There's a HUGE difference between preventing your child from harming themselves and controlling everything they do for the rest of their lives. If you don't know that then I hope you never have children - for their sake.

Originally posted by whodey
You are brushing aside my point. If there is a God and he is manevolent, would you not be suffering this very moment? In fact, why would we all not be suffering at this very moment? If God is manevolent, he is either not all powerful or all knowing.

I don't know. If there was a god and he was malevolent then maybe he's waiting to get to me.

Also, how do you know that I'm not suffering at the moment? I could be.

There's no reason why a god would be 100% malevolent. He could have good and bad days. He could be manic depressive. HE'S FICTIONAL so he could be the tooth fairy.