Are you for or against the separation of church and state?

[Angrboda]

[Undeceived]

God creates Adam and Eve, who are babies in the greatest sense of the word. They know nothing of logic or reason, and must be taught everything.

Adam and Eve are humans, therefore they possess both logic and reason. God gave Adam lordship over all the plants and animals-- you think God would have given that power to a baby? On top of that, God explicitly told Adam and Eve not to eat of the tree. They knew right from wrong. How could eating the fruit be perceived as anything but blatant disobedience?

@ Esquilax, how do you define sin, it seems you are trying to make it a physical thing, like trees or rocks or what ever.

I don't define sin. I don't care to, and I don't really have to either, since I was under the impression that most theists also attribute the majority of their better instincts and emotional states to god too, not to mention abstract concepts like morality and love. Plus all that divine plan stuff, and the "god's truth written on every heart," argument I occasionally hear... it seems like god just creates everything regardless of its physicality of conceptual nature. So while I doubt sin is some physical entity to most theists, god seems sort of in the bag for non-physical things too.

So it doesn't matter what sin is, just where it came from.

If God creates heat, does He have to create cold too?

[The Grand Nudger]

Adam and Eve are humans, therefore they possess both logic and reason.

In equal amounts, one would assume, as any of my many children. Hopefully god gifted them with an extra dose, because any two children wandering around in a magical fucking garden told not to break some rule..well...no, nvm clearly god didn't gift them with any extra dose - because the story pans out just like every day pans out in my home.

Minus, of course - any curse I might place on them for being children

[Esquilax]

If God creates heat, does He have to create cold too?

He does if your claim is that god created the universe and everything in it. He does if your claim is that one should give him credit for every good thing in your life as though he did it for you or allowed you to experience it. He does if you attribute to him a divine plan through which nothing that happens escapes his sight.

So, I guess my question is: do you believe in god, or are you an atheist?

[smax]

God creates Adam and Eve, who are babies in the greatest sense of the word. They know nothing of logic or reason, and must be taught everything.

Adam and Eve are humans, therefore they possess both logic and reason. God gave Adam lordship over all the plants and animals-- you think God would have given that power to a baby?

Yeah, I think god is just that stupid. Or, as I said, he just likes to see shit get screwed up.

As I pointed out, he did put his worst enemy in the playpin with his babies. That's either stupidity or a sadistic game. I can't help but notice that you didn't address that point.

On top of that, God explicitly told Adam and Eve not to eat of the tree. They knew right from wrong. How could eating the fruit be perceived as anything but blatant disobedience?

I don't know about you, but I when I want to prevent a child from doing something I don't want them to do, I keep it the hell away from them, or I keep them the hell away from it.

And, the last thing I would do is subject them to a superior intellect who had designs on getting them to rebel against me.

[festive1]

If God creates heat, does He have to create cold too?

I thought cold was the absence of heat... Like the default setting. Everything is cold unless there is some force or energy to heat it... Right?

[Tonus]

I think that's his point. Cold is the absence of heat, like sin is the absence of good, or something like that. It's from one of those stories that get tossed around on the internet, where the clever, god-fearing student puts the smug, atheist professor in his place.

[The Grand Nudger]

A troublesome concept for the afflicted either way. If one claimed that cold was just a default state to which heat could be added - in te context of a creation and especially as applied to sin one would have to first accept that this comparison leads to the question - I see, so defaults existed that god had no hand in creating, merely adding some extra sauce?

On the other hand, if one wishes to maintain that by creating heat cold was poofed into existence simultaneously the same comparison with sin would leave us with no choice but to accept that in creating the good "the bad" was poofed into existence (though perhaps not intentionally)

So what do we have here, between these two running gags? A god which made modifications to an existing default (less impressive than they would hope for) or an incompetent god who unintentionally created the very thing it abhorred in it's failed attempt to create the thing it desired. Or (we could just call our apologist a bullshitter) a god which created both the good and the bad - and why the hell are we trying to weasel our way out of this anyway..it;s fucking god after all? They can have any of them.

The sad truth, is that the faithful are rarely satisfied with the things they've pigeonholed their gods into...and this might be why they have been changing them since they were first uttered into existence.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

I think that's his point. Cold is the absence of heat, like sin is the absence of good, or something like that. It's from one of those stories that get tossed around on the internet, where the clever, god-fearing student puts the smug, atheist professor in his place.

Oh you mean the story where the guy starts of by saying he's a Christian and the it turns out its Einstein?

[Tonus]

Oh you mean the story where the guy starts of by saying he's a Christian and the it turns out its Einstein?

That's the one! Often the student is identified as Einstein, yes. There are some extended versions where the professor deconstructs the transparent reasoning of the student. I don't think the student turns out to be Einstein in that version.